sustainability

Article
Can Digital Transformation Promote Green
Technology Innovation?
Long Xue, Qianyu Zhang, Xuemang Zhang * and Chengyu Li *

School of Economics and Management, Zhengzhou University of Light Industry, Science Avenue 136,
Zhengzhou 450002, China; [email protected] (L.X.); [email protected] (Q.Z.)
* Correspondence: [email protected] (X.Z.); [email protected] (C.L.)

Abstract: Using the index of the degree of digital transformation of enterprises constructed based on
text analysis, and combining the data of Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2007
to 2020, a panel data model was established to empirically study the impact of digital transformation
on green technology innovation and the mechanism of action and to further analyze the impact
of heterogeneity. The results show that digital transformation can significantly promote green
technology innovation, and its internal mechanism is that digital transformation can improve the
level of green technology innovation by alleviating financing constraints and attracting government
subsidies. Compared with nonstate-owned enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises,
digital transformation plays a more significant role in promoting green technology innovation in
state-owned enterprises and large-scale enterprises. Therefore, the government should regulate the
market order and formulate reasonable financial policies to provide policy and financial support for
enterprises to carry out digital transformation, mobilize the willingness of enterprises to carry out
green technology innovation and improve the level of green technology innovation in China.

Keywords: digital transformation; green technology innovation; financing constraints; government

subsidies; green development
Citation: Xue, L.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang,
X.; Li, C. Can Digital Transformation
Promote Green Technology
Innovation? Sustainability 2022, 14, 1. Introduction
7497. https://doi.org/10.3390/ In the post-epidemic period, the green recovery plan with carbon neutrality as the core
su14127497 has become the world’s largest consensus [1]. In 2021, The State Council of the People’s
Academic Editor: Luigi Aldieri
Republic of China issued the “Carbon Peaking Action Plan before 2030”, which listed
green and low-carbon technological innovation actions as the “Top Ten Carbon Peaks”,
Received: 29 May 2022 encouraging all industries to carry out green reform, development and innovation. [2] In
Accepted: 16 June 2022 addition, under the call of the new development concepts of “building a market-oriented
Published: 20 June 2022
green technology innovation system” and “innovation, coordination, green, openness, and
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral sharing”, green technology innovation reflects the two development concepts of green
with regard to jurisdictional claims in development and innovation-driven development. The combination point is to jump out
published maps and institutional affil- of the vicious circle of “economic development–environmental pollution” and pursue
iations. a “win–win” development model for the environment and economy. Green technology
innovation is the first driving force for green development and an important focus for
promoting the construction of an ecological civilization. As the main initiators, demanders
and implementers of innovation, enterprises should shoulder the burden of sustainable
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
development, i.e., the responsibility of accelerating green technology innovation and
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
promoting the economy and environment.
This article is an open access article
In the “14th Five-Year Plan” and the 2035 long-term vision target outline, “Accelerating
distributed under the terms and
digital development and building a digital China” is listed as a separate article, the article
conditions of the Creative Commons
proposes that we should take the digital transformation as the driving force of the changes
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
in production, life and governance; vigorously promote the deep integration of the digital
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
economy and the real economy [3]; and encourage the promotion of digital transformation

Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127497 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 2 of 20

to enable all walks of life transformation and upgrading so as to provide new directions and
new paths for the innovative development of enterprises. Digitalization is a transformation,
not a technical challenge, and it has a lasting impact on businesses. Organizations that
cultivate digital technology and strategic thinking will be in an advantageous position in
market competition. Data technologies such as artificial intelligence, the cloud comput-
ing technology, and big data analysis affect enterprises’ innovative business practices in
terms of green manufacturing, waste manufacturing, and efficient manufacturing, forcing
enterprises to innovate green technologies and maximize the use of resources to reduce
the possibility of environmental pollution [4]. However, at this stage, enterprises have
insufficient understanding of the importance and connection of digital transformation
and green technology innovation. The supporting role of digital transformation on green
technology innovation has not been fully exerted, and green technology innovation still
faces serious financing bottlenecks. Based on this, this paper mainly answers the following
questions: (1) Does digital transformation have a significant positive role in promoting
green technology innovation? (2) By what mechanism is this effect achieved? (3) Is the
impact heterogeneous in terms of property rights and firm size? This paper takes the
data of Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2007 to 2020 as a sample,
establishes a panel data model, empirically studies the relationship between digital transfor-
mation and green technology innovation, and tests the transmission mechanism of digital
transformation to promote the improvement of green technology innovation. This not only
helps to accurately reveal the direct impact of digital transformation on green technology
innovation and the intermediary transmission effect and fills the relevant research gaps
but also is of great significance for improving the level of corporate green technology
innovation and promoting green economic growth and achieving the double carbon goal
in China.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, the literature related to, digital
transformation and green technology innovation is reviewed, and the gaps in the existing
literature and the marginal contributions of this study are presented. In Section 3, the theo-
retical analysis and hypotheses are presented for the questions raised in the introduction.
In Section 4, the empirical model is designed, and the variables in the model are explained
in detail. In Section 5, benchmark regression analysis and mechanism analysis are carried
out, the experimental results are discussed in depth, and questions (1) and (2) are answered,
respectively. In Section 6, robustness tests are conducted to enhance the robustness of the
findings by replacing the explanatory variables, endogeneity tests and lagged effects tests.
In Section 7, heterogeneity analysis is conducted to study the heterogeneity effect of digital
transformation on green technology innovation in different property rights and enterprise
size, answering question (3). In Section 8, this paper summarizes and puts forward relevant
policy suggestions.

2. Literature Review
2.1. Research on the Digital Transformation of Enterprises
Digitalization is becoming the main driver for enterprises to carry out transformation
and innovation. The deep integration of digital technology and business process will help
enterprises upgrade and transform existing technology, products and business process by
using new business model and help enterprises improve their market competitiveness [5,6].
Most current research by scholars focuses on the influencing factors of digital trans-
formation and its economic consequences. Regarding the influencing factors of digital
transformation, Matarazzo et al. argue that perception and learning capabilities are the
first drivers of digital transformation, and the improvement of these dynamic capabilities
will help companies maximize the value of digital transformation [7]. Li argues that en-
trepreneurs can drive digital transformation by managing cognitive renewal, managing
social capital development, business team building, and organizational capacity build-
ing [8]. Li et al. believed that organizational mindfulness will lead companies to develop
strategies about digital transformation to avoid digital technology rigidity and thus maxi-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 3 of 20

mize the value of digital technology [9]. Regarding the economic consequences of digital
transformation, Borowski found that the digitalization of energy companies can help them
reduce operational costs and increase productivity as well as improve the safety, efficiency,
and durability of their energy systems, further increasing the speed of development and
rapid adaptation to market demand [10]. Based on the research of real enterprises, He and
Liu found that digital transformation can effectively reduce costs and improve the utiliza-
tion rate of assets, thus promoting the improvement of economic benefits [11]. However,
Hajli et al. found that only a small percentage of enterprises could benefit from digital
transformation [12]. Qi and Cai concluded that the increased cost of introducing digital
technology would increase with the continuous iteration of digital technology, making it
impossible to measure the total impact of digital transformation on enterprises [13].

2.2. Research on Corporate Green Technology Innovation

Green technology innovation is the primary driving force to lead the green develop-
ment of enterprises and provide important support for high-quality economic development;
overall, it is an important idea to lead the new technological revolution in the new situ-
ation. Green technology innovation can effectively help enterprises to realize the value
of symbiosis of ecological performance and economic performance, and finally make the
resource allocation reach the optimal state. Thus, the study of the influencing factors of
enterprise green technology innovation has become a hot topic nowadays.
From the macro level, most scholars study the impact of environmental regulation on
green technology innovation. For example, Porter and Linde argue that environmental reg-
ulation will produce an “innovation compensation” effect, which will force firms to engage
in green technology innovation [14], i.e., the “Porter hypothesis” which is confirmed by a
large number of scholars through empirical studies [15,16]. To address this, scholars have
classified environmental regulations and analyzed the degree of incentive of different types
of environmental regulations on green technology innovation. Luo et al. found through
empirical evidence that command-and-control and informal regulations significantly pro-
moted green technology innovation in China, supporting Porter’s hypothesis [17]. Yi et al.
argued that command-based policy instruments could only be implemented when the inten-
sity of implementation reached a certain threshold or when the intensity of implementation
of market-based policy instruments was controlled to a certain level [18]. In addition, some
scholars have carried out studies on the influencing factors of green technology innovation
from other macro-environmental perspectives. Lv et al. studied the influence of financial
structure, scale, and efficiency on green technology innovation from the perspective of
China’s financial market environment, and the results show that a reasonable financial
structure will promote the development of green technology innovation [19]. Tang et al.
found that the construction of telecom infrastructure will improve the informatization level
of enterprises, increase the progress space and propagation speed of green technology, and
thus have an incentive effect on green technology innovation [20]. From the micro level,
scholars mainly analyze and discuss from the internal characteristics of enterprises, Palčič
and Prester argue that advanced manufacturing technology contributes to both company
performance and green innovation [21]. Ma et al. found that executive characteristics
have a positive impact on green technology innovation from the perspective of corporate
governance, and when the whole team maintains a moderate fault line strength, it will lead
to endogenous innovation dynamics from the top down [22].

2.3. Research on Digital Transformation and Enterprise Green Technology Innovation

There is little literature linking digital transformation with green technology inno-
vation, and there is a wide divergence of views in the existing literature on the issue of
concern in this paper. One view holds that digital transformation will significantly promote
green technology innovation. Through empirical research, Wang et al. found that the
improvement of digitization level will effectively enhance the technology integration ability
of enterprises, thus promoting the green technology innovation activities of resource-based
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 4 of 20

enterprises [23]; Song et al., taking heavily polluting enterprises as the sample, found that
enterprise digitization mainly promoted enterprise green technology innovation by improv-
ing the enterprise information-sharing level and knowledge integration ability [24]. Li and
Shen found that digital transformation significantly promoted green innovation, and its
promotion effect was more obvious in enterprises with poor quality of internal control and
low shareholding of institutional investors [25]. The other holds that digital transformation
does not significantly promote green technology innovation. Ghasemaghaei and Calic
found that while data diversity and speed improved firms’ innovation performance, data
volume did not play a key role in improving firms’ innovation performance; i.e., big data
are not always good data [26].
Existing studies provide useful references for this paper, but the following areas worth
further research can be found in the existing literature. First, although some scholars have
studied the impact of digital transformation on enterprise green technology innovation,
they mostly choose heavy polluting enterprises or resource-based enterprises as research
samples, while digital transformation is the current trend of enterprise development, and
its impact on enterprise green technology innovation leads to inevitably biased conclusions
if it is only limited to specific types of enterprises for research. Secondly, in existing
studies, scholars have mostly explored the mechanism of digital transformation affecting
green technology innovation from the improvement of technological capability brought
by digital transformation, but less attention has been paid to the convenience brought by
digital transformation in helping enterprises finance and attract government subsidies,
which in turn affects the mechanism of green technology innovation of enterprises. Finally,
scholars in existing studies have not paid attention to the heterogeneous effects of digital
transformation affecting enterprise green technology innovation across different property
rights nature and enterprises of different sizes.
Therefore, this paper selects all the listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen A-
shares as the research sample and constructs a panel data model to study the impact of
digital transformation on green technology innovation. Furthermore, considering that green
technology innovation cannot be achieved without sufficient financial support, this paper
explores the mechanism of digital transformation affecting enterprise green technology
innovation through two channels: digital transformation affecting enterprise financing
constraints and government subsidies. On this basis, we further analyze the heterogeneity
of the impact of digital transformation on green technology innovation among enterprises
with different property rights and different sizes. Compared with existing studies, the
marginal contributions of this paper may lie in: (1) the study sample is selected more
comprehensively, avoiding the possible research bias brought by selecting enterprises in a
particular industry as a sample for the study; (2) exploring the role mechanism of digital
transformation affecting enterprise green technology innovation from the perspective of
financing constraints and government subsidies provides a new research idea to explore the
role mechanism of digital transformation affecting enterprise green technology innovation;
and (3) researching the heterogeneity effect of digital transformation affecting enterprise
green technology innovation for different property rights nature and different enterprise
scales, which makes up for the deficiency in existing studies.

3. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis

3.1. Digital Transformation and Green Technology Innovation
With the advent of the era of the digital economy, digital transformation has become an
irreversible trend. While effectively promoting resource sharing and resource optimization,
it also meets the data element requirements of green technology innovation and penetrates
all aspects of green technology innovation to promote the improvement of the level of
green technology innovation.
With the help of digital technology, information knowledge will be generated, shared
and exchanged in the innovation network with the characteristics of low cost and rapid
dissemination in real time. In the preparation stage, the use of data technology helps
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 5 of 20

enterprises reintegrate and plan information such as products, processes, resources, and the
external environment, effectively solve the problems of information departmentalization,
fragmentation, and information asymmetry, and form a complete data information system
to help enterprises make scientific decisions that are conducive to the common development
of economic benefits and environmental protection. At the same time, enterprises use
advanced digital technology to identify and obtain more network resources, break the
information island, grasp the market development trend and consumer demand, and
accelerate the formation of green creative ideas while forming their resource network [27].
In the development stage, modern enterprises can use internet technology to estab-
lish or participate in the low-cost cooperation and exchange platforms of relevant virtual
green technology innovation organizations, thereby breaking the learning barriers between
organizations that reduce knowledge and information resources due to economic, geo-
graphical and time constraints. This helps the enterprises identify, acquire and absorb
costs; realize collaborative innovation, resource sharing and win–win cooperation among
organizations; and accelerate the progress of research and development and the innovation
of green technology.
In the production process, with green as the guide, data management as the core, and
technology as the key element, the digital management of the entire life cycle of product-
related production factors, production data, and production processes are realized, and
the enterprise product development and production process are supported. This helps
the enterprises adjust the holdings of production factors in real time, optimize resource
allocation, realize lean production, save energy and reduce emissions, avoid resource
waste, improve production efficiency, identify redundant resources and provide resource
guarantees for green technology innovation.
In the consumption link, big data technology is used to sort out and integrate informa-
tion such as customer value, satisfaction, and the repurchase possibility of consumers and
analyze customers’ consumption needs and product supply trends in detail to provide a
clear direction for green technology innovation. This helps the enterprises achieve effective
matching between supply and demand and intelligent monitoring and precise marketing
of business operations, optimize resource allocation, reduce production costs, enhance
production capacity, and provide an impetus for green technology innovation.
Based on the above analysis, this paper believes that digital transformation penetrates
all aspects of green technology innovation, thus effectively promoting green technology
innovation. Therefore, this paper proposes Hypothesis 1.
H1. Digital transformation has a significant role in promoting the improvement of enterprises’
green technology innovation level.

3.2. Analysis of Influence Mechanism of Financing Constraint Channels

The management is the main initiator of green technology innovation, and the R&D
team is the important driving force of innovation. Sufficient R&D investment will help
knowledge workers give full play to their value and output innovation achievements
smoothly [28,29]. The financing constraint of enterprises makes the R&D investment insuf-
ficient to a large extent, which affects the innovation output [30]. Since the green technology
innovation industry has the characteristics of high risk and high income, in the early stage
of research and development, the investment object has not yet formed the expected income
of the entity, and the investment risk is extremely high. The investment return period is
long, which makes it difficult to obtain a steady stream of high-quality capital inflows [31]
compared to other industries and contributes to more serious financing constraints. The
investment and financing selection process of an enterprise is a process in which various
stakeholders play games to maximize their interests. At different stages of enterprise devel-
opment, enterprises’ demand for capital will change accordingly. The moral hazard caused
by information asymmetry makes investors cautious about enterprises’ credit behavior,
which leads to financing constraints. Digital transformation enables enterprises to take
advantage of digital technology to reduce information asymmetry and principal–agent
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 6 of 20

costs in the credit market, thereby alleviating financing constraints and raising sufficient
funds for enterprises to carry out green technology innovation activities.
First, digital transformation alleviates the problem of information asymmetry to a
certain extent. For enterprises, a sound digital foundation and digital industry will increase
the internal and external information communication channels of the enterprise, amplify
the speed, breadth and transparency of information dissemination, and help financial
institutions grasp the financial and non-financial information of the capital demander more
quickly. For investment institutions, pre-investment institutions can evaluate and integrate
enterprise information in an all-around way, promote the rapid matching of information on
both sides, improve the efficiency of enterprises in obtaining financial assistance, alleviate
the problem of credit mismatch, and supervise the use and allocation of funds within
the enterprise in real-time information, such as capital flow, expected income, repayment
probability, etc., to effectively avoid green innovation risks caused by irregular market
operations and unbalanced internal control of enterprises. This optimizes the resource
allocation and risk prevention and control system of investment institutions, reducing
credit risks such as bad debt losses, improving investor confidence and willingness, further
breaking the shackles of financing constraints, and providing sufficient capital guarantees
for the green technology innovation of enterprises [32].
Second, digital transformation has reduced principal–agent costs to a certain extent.
The extensive application of digital technology further reduces the cost of information
acquisition by investment institutions and the execution cost of the supervision and control
of the subsequent use of funds and enhances the efficiency of supervision and repayment
management of enterprises. The effective combination of green technology innovation
activities provides more opportunities for green technology innovation activities.
Third, digital transformation improves the environment for the external information
dissemination of enterprises and helps enterprises broaden financing channels. The devel-
opment and application of digital technology help enterprises integrate financial resources
that are small and scattered in the market. Compared with the difficulty of traditional
transaction costs that are too high and difficult-to-absorb funds, technologies such as big
data, artificial intelligence and blockchain help enterprises achieve low cost. They collect
massive amounts of data in a risky and high-reward manner and absorb and integrate
more funds for enterprises to carry out green technology innovation activities [33].
Based on the above analysis, we find that digital transformation can effectively al-
leviate the difficulties of corporate financing constraints so that enterprises can obtain
financial support in a timely, accurate and sufficient manner to carry out green technology
innovation activities. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is proposed.
H2. Digital transformation promotes green technology innovation by easing financing constraints.

3.3. Analysis of Influence Mechanism of Government Subsidy Channels

Difficulty in financing is the main factor hindering green technology innovation.
In addition to financing from social capital, government subsidies are the most direct
external resource support for enterprise R&D and innovation. Innovation is “icing on the
cake” [34]. Currently, digital transformation has become a general trend. The requirements
of the times, policies and regulations have created a good environment for encouraging
enterprises to carry out digital transformation. Enterprises that actively comply with
social trends and actively respond to the call of the times are more likely to be favored
by the government; the dynamic capabilities contained in it can significantly change the
organization mode, information structure, production mode, etc., of the enterprise and
ultimately affect the innovation consciousness and behavior of the enterprise, help the
enterprise form its core competitiveness, and realize the final strategic adjustment [35] and
business potential. Compared with traditional enterprises, such enterprises are more likely
to attract government subsidies. Finally, digital transformation helps enterprises effectively
integrate resources, technologies, and talent so that funds flow to places with higher
utilization efficiency, thereby improving the problem of resource misallocation. At the same
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 7 of 20

time, according to the big data tracking user needs, digital transformation achieves precise
production, thereby optimizing the structure of capital utilization, improving the efficiency
of capital utilization, and maximizing the role of government subsidies in promoting green
technology innovation activities, thereby attracting more government subsidies. Therefore,
Hypothesis 3 is proposed.
H3. Digital transformation promotes green technology innovation by attracting government grants.

4. Study Design
4.1. Sample Selection and Data Sources
This paper takes Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share companies from 2007 to 2020 as a
sample and performs the following initial processing: 1 ST and *ST company samples
are excluded. 2 Companies with missing data and abnormal data are excluded. 3
Financial companies are excluded. To prevent extreme values from affecting the results, the
continuous variables at the enterprise level are abbreviated at the 1% level. After the above
processing, 15,029 groups of observations are finally obtained. Among them, the green
patent data come from the Chinese Research Data Services Platform (CNRDS), and the
financial data of other companies are downloaded from the China Stock Market Accounting
Research Database (CSMAR).

4.2. Definition of Main Variables

4.2.1. Explained Variable
Green technology innovation (LNPATENT). The number of patent applications is often
used to measure the innovation output of enterprises in the literature. Green patents refer
to inventions, utility models and design patents with green technology as the theme of the
invention. Among them, invention patents can better reflect the technological innovation
of enterprises, which is followed by utility models and designs. This paper draws on
the variable selection method of Li and Zheng, obtains relevant data from the Chinese
Research Data Services Platform (CNRDS), and takes the natural logarithm of the number
of invention patents plus 1 as an indicator to measure the company’s green technology
innovation [36].

4.2.2. Explanatory Variable

Degree of digital transformation (LNDC). Digitization mainly refers to the wide
application of digital technologies, including artificial intelligence technology, blockchain
technology, cloud computing technology, big data technology, and digital technology
applications. This paper draws on the research of Wu et al. and uses the text mining method
to calculate the frequency of subdivision indicators of related technologies appearing in the
report, adds them to the sum and adds 1 to take the natural logarithm as a measure of the
degree of digital transformation of enterprises. All data come from the China Stock Market
Accounting Research Database (CSMAR) [37].

4.2.3. Mediating Variables

Financing constraint (SA). This paper draws on the research of Hadlock and Pierce
and uses the absolute value of the SA index to measure financing constraints [38].
Government grants (LNZFBZ). The data come from the government subsidy part of
other income in the annual report of the sample listed companies.

4.2.4. Control Variables

Referring to the relevant literature, this paper selects the age of business (LNAGE),
the cash flow (CASH), the shareholding ratio of the top ten shareholders (TOP10), the ratio
of fixed assets (FAT), the growth of the company (GROWTH), the current ratio (LIQUID),
and the asset–liability ratio (LEV) as holding variables. Industry (IND) and year (YEAR)
dummy variables are set to control the effects of industry and time on the regression results.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 8 of 20

The specific definitions of the key variables, mediating variables and control variables in
this paper are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Variable Definitions.

Variable Type Name Symbol Definition

Green technology Applications for green inventions in that year to take
Explained variable LNPATENT
innovation the natural logarithm
Frequency of occurrence of subdivision indicators of
artificial intelligence technology, blockchain
Degree of digital technology, cloud computing technology, big data
Explanatory variable LNDC
transformation technology, and digital technology application in the
report is summed up and added to 1 to take the
natural logarithm
Financing constraints SA |SA| = |−0.737 × Size + 0.043 × Size2 − 0.040 × Age|
Mediating variables
Government subsidy LNZFBZ Other income parts of the announcement
Add 1 to the difference between the date of
Business age LNAGE establishment of the company and the year of the
current year and then take the logarithm
Cash flow CASH Monetary fund/total assets
Shareholding ratio of the top
TOP10 Sum of shareholding ratios of the top ten shareholders
Control variables ten shareholders
Fixed asset ratio FAT Net fixed assets/total assets
(This year’s operating income − last year’s operating
Business growth GROWTH
income)/last year’s operating income)
Current ratio LIQUID Current assets/current liabilities
Asset–liability ratio LEV Total liabilities/total assets
Industry IND Industry dummy variable
Year YEAR Annual dummy variable

4.3. Empirical Model Design

To effectively identify the relationship between enterprise digital transformation and
green technology innovation, this paper sets the following benchmark regression shown in
Model (1):

LNPATENTi,t = α0 + α1 LNDCi,t + α2 Coni,t + ∑ YEAR + ∑ IND + ε i,t (1)

LNPATENT represents green technology innovation, LNDC represents the degree of

digital transformation, Con represents the remaining control variables, YEAR and IND
are annual and industry dummy variables used to control time and industry effects, and ε
represents random disturbance terms.
To verify H2 and H3, this paper introduces the intersection term of digital transfor-
mation and financing constraint or government subsidy based on Model (1), and it builds
Model (2):

LNPATENTi,t = β 0 + β 1 LNDCi,t + β 2 SAi.t /LNZFBZi,t + β 3 LNDCi,t × SAi,t /LNZFBZi.t

(2)
+ β 4 Coni,t + ∑ I ND + ∑ YEAR + ε i,t

SA stands for financing constraints, LNZFBZ stands for government subsidies, and the
meanings of the remaining variables are consistent with Model (1). If the coefficient β 3 is
significant and greater than zero, it means that the two mechanisms of financing constraints
and government subsidies are established.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 9 of 20

5. Empirical Results and Analysis

5.1. Descriptive Statistics
In Table 2, the average value of the digital transformation degree (LNDC) is 1.775,
indicating that domestic listed companies have a low degree of digital transformation and
weak awareness of transformation; the minimum and maximum values of green technology
innovation (LNPATENT) are 0 and 4.304, respectively, with a standard deviation of 1.011,
indicating that the level of technological innovation varies greatly among enterprises; the
value distribution of other control variables is consistent with the actual situation, and no
abnormality has been found.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistical Analysis.

Variable Sample Mean Median SD Min Max

LNPATENT 15,029 0.681 0.000 1.011 0.000 4.304
LNDC 15,029 1.775 1.609 1.337 0.000 4.997
LNAGE 15,029 2.849 2.890 0.358 0.693 4.143
CASH 15,029 0.203 0.162 0.142 0.022 0.696
TOP10 15,029 0.595 0.607 0.148 0.243 0.902
FAT 15,029 0.180 0.146 0.143 0.002 0.655
GROWTH 15,029 0.385 0.173 0.789 −0.608 5.114
LIQUID 15,029 2.688 1.787 2.715 0.385 17.52
LEV 15,029 0.403 0.393 0.199 0.051 0.861

5.2. Benchmark Regression Results

Table 3 reports the benchmark regression results of the degree of digital transformation
of enterprises on green technology innovation. In the regression model, when we control
the industry, annual dummy variables and control variables, the regression coefficients of
digital transformation are 0.1172, 0.1266, 0.1203, and 0.1149, respectively, and each is signifi-
cant at the 1% level. This result confirms the establishment of H1 and answers question (1),
which shows that enterprise digital transformation has a significant promoting effect
on green technology innovation. Specifically, digital transformation enables enterprises
to reorganize innovative elements such as product manufacturing, design and develop-
ment, and technological processes with representative digital technologies, innovate green
energy-saving technologies, improve product added value and market competitiveness,
and promote the improvement of enterprises’ green technology innovation level.

Table 3. Benchmark regression results.

(1) (2) (3) (4)

Variable
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.1172 *** 0.1266 *** 0.1203 *** 0.1149 ***
(19.22) (18.35) (19.16) (16.93)
LNAGE 0.0070 0.0629 **
(0.30) (2.55)
CASH 0.0180 0.2769 ***
(0.26) (4.14)
TOP10 −0.1089 * 0.0143
(−1.96) (0.26)
FAT −0.3173 *** −0.3720 ***
(−5.06) (−5.38)
GROWTH −0.0110 −0.0075
(−1.07) (−0.75)
LIQUID −0.0042 −0.0117 ***
(−0.99) (−2.93)
LEV 1.0797 *** 1.1931 ***
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 10 of 20

Table 3. Cont.

(1) (2) (3) (4)

Variable
LNPATENT
(19.98) (22.07)
CONS 0.4729 *** 0.1527 0.1463 * −0.4525 ***
(34.90) (1.02) (1.67) (−2.74)
IND No Yes No Yes
YEAR No Yes No Yes
N 15,029 15,029 15,029 15,029
R2 0.0240 0.1766 0.0728 0.2250
Adj−R2 0.0239 0.1716 0.0723 0.2199
F 369.4899 35.2103 147.3944 44.2372
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

5.3. Examination of Impact Mechanism of Digital Transformation on Green Technology Innovation

This paper examines the effect mechanism of digital transformation on green technol-
ogy innovation from the perspectives of financing constraints and government subsidies.
Table 4 mainly reports the test results of the mechanism of financing constraints and gov-
ernment subsidies in the impact of digital transformation on green technology innovation.
Column (1) shows that the multiplication term of digital transformation and financing con-
straints (LNDC × SA) is positively significant at the 1% level, and the coefficient is 0.1283.
The results indicate that financing constraint is a functional channel in the process of digital
transformation, promoting green technology innovation. The above results verify H2 and
answer question (2): digital transformation can improve the level of green technology
innovation by alleviating financing constraints. That is, digital transformation has injected
new vitality into enterprises, enabling enterprises to effectively integrate the internal infor-
mation and resources of enterprises by using artificial intelligence, cloud computing, big
data and other technologies and rationally improve information with external investment
institutions by strengthening digital governance capabilities and improving information
transparency. This helps to reduce information asymmetry and unbalanced supply and
demand, which improves their willingness to lend, greatly alleviates the problem of the
external financing constraints of enterprises, attracts a large number of funds for enterprises,
and increases sufficient financial power for green technology innovation.
Column (2) shows that the multiplication term of digital transformation and govern-
ment subsidies (LNDC × LNZFBZ) is positively significant at the 1% level with a coefficient
of 0.0352. The results show that government subsidy is a functional channel in the process
of digital transformation to promote green technology innovation. The above results verify
H3 and answer question (2): digital transformation promotes green technology innovation
by attracting government subsidies. That is, the digital transformation of the enterprise
actively responds to the call of the times and the government, and through the reconstruc-
tion and optimization of the enterprise’s organizational structure, marketing mode, and
production mode, it improves its operation and management efficiency and releases the
signal of the enterprise’s strong productivity. The disclosed information is screened, and it
attracts the government to provide free funds for enterprises for innovation activities and
lays a certain capital foundation for enterprises to carry out green technology innovation.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 11 of 20

Table 4. Test results of mechanism of financing constraints and government subsidy channels.

(1) (2)
Variable
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.1157 *** 0.0767 ***
(17.01) (8.41)
SA −0.6875 ***
(−13.40)
LNDC × SA 0.1283 ***
(5.71)
LNZFBZ 0.2745 ***
(38.26)
LNDC × LNZFBZ 0.0352 ***
(7.24)
LNAGE 0.4420 *** 0.0532
(11.89) (1.47)
CASH 0.2933 *** 0.2204 **
(4.39) (2.37)
TOP10 −0.1023 * −0.1084
(−1.88) (−1.49)
FAT −0.3611 *** −0.4525 ***
(−5.20) (−4.68)
GROWTH −0.0070 0.0082
(−0.70) (0.60)
LIQUID −0.0168 *** 0.0001
(−4.19) (0.02)
LEV 1.1469 *** 0.7181 ***
(21.00) (9.13)
CONS 1.1280 *** −4.3333 ***
(5.49) (−18.96)
IND Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes
N 13,523 7887
R2 0.3139 0.3482
Adj−R2 0.3088 0.3409
F 61.4056 47.3467
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

6. Robustness Analysis
6.1. Test Results after Remeasurement Based on Green Technology Innovation
Table 5 shows the results of the regression of the sum of the number of green in-
ventions and utility models plus 1 to take the natural logarithm as the new explained
variable number of patent applications (LNTOTAL). In the regression process, to control
the industry, the annual dummy variable and the control variables were selected. The
regression coefficients of digital transformation were 0.0976, 0.1247, 0.1086, and 0.1132,
and they were all significant at the 1% level. The regression results once again verify the
establishment of H1, that is, digital transformation has a positive role in promoting green
technology innovation.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 12 of 20

Table 5. Robustness test results of remeasure of explained variables.

(1) (2) (3) (4)

Variable
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.0976 *** 0.1247 *** 0.1086 *** 0.1132 ***
(13.38) (15.63) (14.52) (14.50)
LNAGE −0.0465 * 0.0403
(−1.68) (1.42)
CASH −0.1942 ** 0.2362 ***
(-2.36) (3.07)
TOP10 −0.1507 ** −0.0173
(−2.28) (−0.28)
FAT −0.2942 *** −0.2661 ***
(−3.94) (−3.35)
GROWTH −0.0238 * −0.0089
(−1.94) (−0.77)
LIQUID −0.0071 −0.0171 ***
(−1.40) (−3.70)
LEV 1.3523 *** 1.4810 ***
(21.01) (23.82)
CONS 0.7999 *** 0.1261 0.5785 *** −0.5495 ***
(49.33) (0.73) (5.54) (−2.90)
IND No Yes No Yes
YEAR No Yes No Yes
N 15,029 15,029 15,029 15,029
R2 0.0118 0.2207 0.0704 0.2754
Adj−R2 0.0117 0.2159 0.0700 0.2707
F 178.9980 46.4777 142.2887 57.9156
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

6.2. Endogeneity Problem

6.2.1. Propensity Score Matching
Because of the possible problem of sample selection bias, this study used the samples
after propensity score matching to perform regression analysis again. 1 According to
whether the digital transformation (LNDC) has a value, it is recorded as 0 or 1; that is,
“1” indicates that the enterprise has undergone digital transformation, and “0” indicates
that the enterprise has not undergone digital transformation. 2 The propensity score
corresponding to each observation sample is calculated by the logit model, in which the
explained variables are the digital transformation (LNDC) dummy variables (DCC), and
the explanatory variables are all the control variables used in this study. To eliminate the
influence of sample selection bias as much as possible, this study uses 1:1 nearest neighbor
matching, 1:4 nearest neighbor matching and kernel matching for score matching. 3 The
matched samples are used for regression.
Table 6 reports the results of the sample regression analysis after propensity score
matching. Column (1) is the result of 1:1 nearest neighbor matching, Column (2) is the
result of 1:4 nearest neighbor matching, and Column (3) is the result of kernel matching.
The regression results all show that digital transformation and green technology innovation
are positively significant at the 1% level, with coefficients of 0.0782, 0.1010, and 0.1150. The
regression results again verified the establishment of H1, that is, digital transformation has
a significant positive effect on green technology innovation enhancement.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 13 of 20

Table 6. Robustness test results for propensity score matching.

(1) 1:1 Nearest (2) 1:4 Nearest

(3) Kernel Matching
Variable Neighbor Matching Neighbor Matching
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.0782 *** 0.1010 *** 0.1150 ***
(6.81) (12.23) (16.92)
LNAGE −0.0215 0.0124 0.0627 **
(−0.52) (0.41) (2.54)
CASH 0.3049 ** 0.3345 *** 0.2762 ***
(2.52) (3.83) (4.12)
TOP10 0.0292 0.0566 0.0143
(0.32) (0.85) (0.26)
FAT −0.1976 * −0.3568 *** −0.3718 ***
(−1.79) (−4.37) (−5.38)
GROWTH 0.0072 −0.0042 −0.0074
(0.43) (−0.33) (−0.74)
LIQUID −0.0106 −0.0150 *** −0.0117 ***
(−1.56) (−3.17) (−2.92)
LEV 1.1149 *** 1.1066 *** 1.1937 ***
(12.44) (16.74) (22.07)
CONS −0.0383 −0.2158 −0.4525 ***
(−0.16) (−1.11) (−2.74)
IND Yes Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes Yes
N 4835 9577 15,025
R2 0.2198 0.2218 0.2249
Adj−R2 0.2038 0.2138 0.2199
F 13.7550 27.5707 44.2042
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

6.2.2. Heckman Two-Stage Regression Model

To reduce the possible problem of sample selection bias, this study used the Heckman
two-stage regression model for testing. In Heckman stage 1, the Probit model was selected
for regression, the explained variable is the aforementioned digital transformation dummy
variable (DCC), the provincial digital economy development index (SCORE) is used as an
exogenous instrument variable, and the annual and industry effects and control variables
are controlled. The inverse Mills ratio (IMR) was calculated after the regression. This
study draws on the research of Zhao et al. to calculate the provincial digital economy
development index from 2011 to 2020 and constructs the entropy weight method from five
aspects: internet penetration rate, number of internet-related employees, internet-related
output, number of mobile internet users, and digital financial inclusion index [39]. The
reason for choosing this variable is that the digital transformation of enterprises is often
driven by the policies of the local government and at the same time depends on the support
of the local digital infrastructure and development environment. Therefore, the provincial
digital economy development index is an important exogenous variable that affects the
digital transformation of enterprises.
Table 7 reports the robustness test results of the Heckman two-stage regression. The
Probit regression results in the first stage show that the regression coefficient of the provin-
cial digital economy development index is positive, indicating that the rapid development
of the provincial digital economy has promoted the digital transformation of local enter-
prises. In the second-stage regression, the inverse Mills ratio (IMR) was introduced as a
control variable into Model (1) and Model (2) for regression. The regression coefficients
were 0.1163, 0.1171 and 0.0767, respectively, they were all positively significant at the level
of 1% and the results show that all the hypotheses proposed in this paper are valid after
considering the endogenous problems caused by sample selection bias.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 14 of 20

Table 7. Heckman two-stage robustness test results.

First Stage Second Stage

Variable
DCC LNPATENT
LNDC 0.1164 *** 0.1171 *** 0.0762 ***
(16.60) (16.74) (8.40)
SA −0.6880 ***
(−12.85)
LNDC × SA 0.1576 ***
(6.68)
LNZFBZ 0.2720 ***
(38.15)
LNDC ×
0.0372 ***
LNZFBZ
(7.60)
LNAGE −0.1167 *** 0.0935 *** 0.4863 *** 0.1319 ***
(−2.58) (3.49) (12.15) (3.38)
CASH 0.0030 0.2814 *** 0.3007 *** 0.2094 **
(0.02) (4.04) (4.33) (2.30)
TOP10 0.1829 * −0.0594 −0.1703 *** −0.2429 ***
(1.89) (−1.04) (−2.96) (−3.16)
FAT −0.9691 *** −0.1197 −0.0755 0.2473
(−8.08) (−1.22) (−0.77) (1.43)
GROWTH −0.0311 * 0.0038 0.0063 0.0292 **
(−1.72) (0.36) (0.60) (2.06)
LIQUID −0.0402 *** −0.0023 −0.0071 0.0253 ***
(−5.48) (−0.47) (−1.43) (3.19)
LEV −0.0760 1.2459 *** 1.1828 *** 0.7600 ***
(−0.78) (22.05) (20.78) (9.79)
SCORE 0.2752 *
(1.73)
IMR −0.6404 *** −0.7258 *** −1.9868 ***
(−3.54) (−4.00) (−4.84)
CONS 1.0847 *** −0.1427 1.4677 *** −4.1559 ***
(4.22) (−0.91) (7.35) (−18.17)
IND Yes Yes Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes Yes Yes
N 14,254 14,254 14,095 7864
R2 0.2247 0.2392 0.3478
Adj−R2 0.2198 0.2342 0.3406
F 45.6137 47.8639 48.2298
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

6.3. Hysteresis Effect

At present, the penetration rate of digital transformation in enterprises is low, and
even if a company has undergone digital transformation, its positive impact on enterprises
cannot be immediately apparent. That is, the digital transformation of previous years
has also had an impact on this year’s innovation activities. At the same time, green
innovation activities are different from ordinary innovation activities, which require stricter
control and planning or even longer periods to produce. Therefore, to avoid the negative
impact of time lag on the empirical results, this study uses the number of lag periods for
further testing. Table 8 reflects the regression results after lagging digital transformation
by one, two, and three periods. The results all show that digital transformation and green
technology innovation are positively significant at the 1% level, and their coefficients are
0.1193, 0.1218, and 0.1302. Consistent with the previous conclusions, this result again
verifies the validity of H1, that is, digital transformation has a significant role in promoting
green technology innovation.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 15 of 20

Table 8. Results of lag effect test.

(1) (2) (3)

Variable
LNPATENT
L1LNDC 0.1193 ***
(13.84)
L2LNDC 0.1218 ***
(12.32)
L3LNDC 0.1302 ***
(12.01)
LNAGE 0.1122 *** 0.1455 *** 0.1867 ***
(3.43) (3.70) (4.18)
CASH 0.4883 *** 0.6263 *** 0.6564 ***
(5.46) (5.93) (5.60)
TOP10 −0.0012 −0.0183 0.1863 **
(−0.02) (−0.22) (2.09)
FAT −0.4187 *** −0.5395 *** −0.5499 ***
(−4.64) (−5.14) (−4.86)
GROWTH −0.0004 −0.0074 −0.0056
(−0.03) (−0.48) (−0.33)
LIQUID −0.0131 ** −0.0206 *** −0.0263 ***
(−2.31) (−2.98) (−3.34)
LEV 1.2598 *** 1.2418 *** 1.2083 ***
(17.98) (15.32) (13.70)
CONS −0.3637 * −0.2141 −0.5282 *
(−1.68) (−0.87) (−1.93)
IND Yes Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes Yes
N 9984 7928 6929
R2 0.2271 0.2358 0.2418
Adj−R2 0.2196 0.2269 0.2320
F 30.2616 26.5700 24.5109
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

7. Further Discussion
7.1. Heterogeneity Analysis of Property Rights of Enterprises
Digital transformation requires a wide range of resources, such as advanced technol-
ogy, large-scale investment, and professional talent. Different business properties will have
different degrees of impact. State-owned enterprises have abundant resources, technologies
and talent and can implement policies in a timely and good manner so that digital transfor-
mation can be combined with its original advantages to the greatest extent to truly exert its
positive influence and promote the high-quality development of state-owned enterprises.
At the same time, due to their special industrial nature, state-owned enterprises undertake
heavier tasks of energy conservation and emission reduction and have a strong sense of
responsibility, which drives them to be more willing to carry out green technology innova-
tion. To verify the heterogeneity of green technology innovation by the nature of different
enterprises, this study divides the sample into state-owned enterprises according to the
nature of enterprise property rights and marks them as “1”, nonstate-owned enterprises as
“0”, and adds control variables and controls the annual effect. The effect and industry effect
were grouped by regression, and then the differences in coefficients between groups were
tested. The regression results are shown in Table 9. Both the digital transformation and
green technology innovation of state-owned enterprises and nonstate-owned enterprises
are positively significant above the level of 1%, with coefficients of 0.1705 and 0.0985, re-
spectively, and the results of the SUR test showed significant results, indicating that digital
transformation promoted green technology innovation in SOEs better than in non-SOEs,
thus answering question (3) with data results.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 16 of 20

Table 9. Heterogeneity test results based on property rights.

State-Owned Enterprise Nonstate-Owned Enterprise

Variable
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.1705 *** 0.0985 ***
(12.38) (13.06)
LNAGE −0.0161 0.0255
(−0.30) (0.91)
CASH −0.0225 0.2392 ***
(−0.16) (3.18)
TOP10 0.6200 *** −0.2284 ***
(5.91) (−3.62)
FAT −0.5185 *** −0.2369 ***
(−4.36) (−2.74)
GROWTH −0.0476 *** −0.0016
(−2.78) (−0.14)
LIQUID −0.0272 ** −0.0082 *
(−2.32) (−1.90)
LEV 0.7862 *** 1.0282 ***
(7.66) (15.88)
CONS −0.7398 *** 0.5756 **
(−2.94) (2.34)
IND Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes
N 4518 10,164
R2 0.3750 0.1895
Adj−R2 0.3626 0.1819
F 30.1991 25.0446
Chi2 (1) = 20.07
Suest
Prob > Chi2 = 0.0000
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1%
levels, respectively.

7.2. Heterogeneity Analysis of Firm Size

The practical effect of enterprise digital transformation will be affected by the scale of
the enterprise, thus affecting the development of green technology innovation activities.
Large enterprises are generally in the middle and upper reaches of the industry, with
sufficient funds and strong anti-risk capabilities. Therefore, such enterprises are more
likely to carry out digital transformation and have a higher willingness to innovate green
technologies. Due to limited resources, technology, talent control, and weak anti-risk
capabilities, the digital transformation results cannot be converted into commercial interests
on time, which is not conducive to digital transformation to a certain extent. For this reason,
this paper takes the mean of the natural logarithm of total enterprise assets as the boundary.
If it is greater, it will be assigned as “1” to indicate a large-scale enterprise, and if it is
smaller, it will be assigned as “0” to indicate small and medium-sized enterprises. Control
variables are added, and the annual effect and industry effect are controlled to carry out
group regression and then test the coefficient difference between groups. The regression
results are shown in Table 10. Regardless of whether it is a large-scale enterprise or a
small or medium-sized enterprise, digital transformation and green technology innovation
are both positively significant above the 1% level, with coefficients of 0.1095 and 0.0795,
respectively, and the results of the SUR test showed significant results, indicating that
digital transformation has a better effect on green technology innovation in large-scale
enterprises than in small and medium-sized enterprises, thus answering question (3) with
data results.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 17 of 20

Table 10. Heterogeneity test results based on firm size.

Large-Scale Enterprise Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

Variable
LNPATENT
LNDC 0.1095 *** 0.0795 ***
(9.20) (11.38)
LNAGE 0.0379 −0.0345
(0.89) (−1.34)
CASH 0.5720 *** 0.1081 *
(4.33) (1.68)
TOP10 0.3576 *** −0.3402 ***
(4.11) (−5.68)
FAT −0.4597 *** −0.4704 ***
(−4.11) (−5.96)
GROWTH −0.0146 0.0189 *
(−0.87) (1.79)
LIQUID −0.0633 *** −0.0129 ***
(−4.89) (−3.60)
LEV 0.8364 *** 0.2504 ***
(8.67) (3.91)
CONS −0.6051 * 0.6139 ***
(−1.96) (3.70)
IND Yes Yes
YEAR Yes Yes
N 6671 8358
R2 0.3206 0.1411
Adj−R2 0.3110 0.1313
F 33.3780 14.4370
Chi2 (1) = 4.36
Suest
Prob > Chi2 = 0.0368
The number in parentheses in the table is t-statistic; * and *** indicate significance at the 10% and 1% levels, respectively.

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

8.1. Research Conclusions
Based on the data on the degree of digital transformation of listed companies in
Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share companies and the data on green patents from 2007 to
2020, this paper conducts an empirical study. The results of the empirical study show
that the digital transformation of enterprises has a significant role in promoting green
technology innovation. After testing and overcoming possible endogeneity problems,
the above research conclusions still hold. Research on the mechanism of action shows
that digital transformation can promote corporate green technology innovation by easing
restraints on corporate financing and attracting more government subsidies. Further
heterogeneity research also found that the promotion effect of digital transformation on
green technology innovation is more significant in state-owned enterprises and large-scale
enterprises. The research results are consistent with the research hypothesis proposed
above, and the questions raised at the beginning of the paper are solved one by one.
The theoretical significance of this study is that: (1) it makes up for the deficiencies
in sample selection in existing studies and expands the existing related studies; (2) it
provides a new perspective to explore the mechanism of the role of digital transformation
in influencing enterprise green technology innovation; (3) it analyzes the heterogeneity of
digital transformation in influencing enterprise green technology innovation based on the
nature and scale of enterprise property rights and expands the existing related studies.
The practical significance of this study lies in the following. (1) This paper reveals the
mechanism of digital transformation to promote enterprise green technology innovation. It
provides corresponding policy enlightenment for the government to further play the pro-
motion role of enterprise digital transformation on green technology innovation to achieve
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 18 of 20

the dual carbon goal. (2) This paper analyzes the heterogeneity of the impact of digital
transformation on enterprise green technology innovation in different property rights and
enterprises of different sizes, providing the empirical experience for the implementation of
government policies. On the one hand, the government can implement targeted policies for
different types of enterprises, and on the other hand, it can help the government accurately
regulate the implementation effect of policies.

8.2. Countermeasures and Suggestions

This paper not only reveals the impact of enterprise digital transformation on enter-
prise green technology innovation but also clarifies its mechanism of action and scientifically
reveals its heterogeneous effect among enterprises with different characteristics. The level
of technological innovation has important policy implications. First, enterprises should
improve their awareness of digital transformation, strengthen the construction of data in-
frastructure, and promote the deep integration of advanced artificial intelligence technology,
blockchain technology, cloud computing technology, big data technology and other tech-
nologies with the company’s business, improve the level of enterprise digitalization, and
improve the digitalization of enterprises. This transformation drives the improvement of
the green technology level of enterprises. Second, the government should increase financial
support for digital transformation enterprises to further break the financing discrimination
and financing constraints that are common in the financial market, especially for nonstate-
owned enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises that lack talent, technology,
and funds. This policy is inclined to provide financial subsidies for digital transformation,
mobilize the willingness and ability of the green technology innovation of such enterprises,
and improve the overall efficiency of green technology innovation. Third, financial institu-
tions should reasonably lower the financing threshold so that more private enterprises and
small and medium-sized enterprises can obtain funds and provide financial support for
the digital transformation of private enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises,
thereby promoting the improvement of enterprises’ green technology innovation level.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.X. and Q.Z.; data curation, Q.Z.; formal analysis, L.X.
and Q.Z.; funding acquisition, L.X., Q.Z. and X.Z.; methodology, Q.Z. and L.X.; software, Q.Z.;
supervision, L.X.; writing—original draft, Q.Z. and L.X.; writing—review and editing, Q.Z., L.X., C.L.
and X.Z.; resources, C.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by National Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences of China
(21CJL006); The Key Scientific Research Projects of Colleges and Universities of Henan Province
(22A790024); National Natural Science Foundation of China (71803181); Science and Technology
Innovative Talents (Humanities and Social Sciences) Program of Henan (2021-CX-019); Key R&D and
Pro-motion Project of Henan (Soft Science Research) (222400410123).
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are openly available in the Chinese
Research Data Services Platform and the China Stock Market Accounting Research Database (CSMAR).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Li, Y. Research on Green Recovery and Green Technology Innovation. J. Tianjin Norm. Univ. 2021, 4, 105–110.
2. Hu, A.G. China’s goal of carbon peak by 2030 and main approaches. J. Beijing Univ. Technol. 2021, 21, 1–15.
3. Chen, J.D.; Wang, J.J. Digital input and manufacturing innovation efficiency. Econ. Surv. 2022, 39, 78–88.
4. Feroz, A.K.; Zo, H.; Chiravuri, A. Digital Transformation and Environmental Sustainability: A Review and Research Agenda.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 1530. [CrossRef]
5. Warner, K.S.R.; Wäger, M. Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal.
Long Range Plan. 2018, 52, 326–439. [CrossRef]
6. Liu, D.Y.; Chen, S.W.; Zhou, Z.C. Resource fit in digital transformation. Manag. Decis. 2012, 49, 1728–1742. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 19 of 20

7. Matarazzo, M.; Penco, L.; Profumo, G.; Quaglia, R. Digital transformation and customer value creation in Made in Italy SMEs: A
dynamic capabilities perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 642–656. [CrossRef]
8. Li, L.; Su, F.; Zhang, W.; Mao, J.Y. Digital transformation by SME entrepreneurs: A capability perspective. Inf. Syst. J. 2018, 28,
1129–1157. [CrossRef]
9. Li, H.L.; Wu, Y.; Cao, D.M.; Wang, Y.C. Organizational mindfulness towards digital transformation as a prerequisite of information
processing capability to achieve market agility. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 122, 700–712. [CrossRef]
10. Borowski, P.F. Digitization, Digital Twins, Blockchain, and Industry 4.0 as Elements of Management Process in Enterprises in the
Energy Sector. Energies 2021, 14, 1885.
11. Tu, X.Y.; Yan, X.L. Digital transformation, knowledge spillover and total factor productivity: Empirical evidence from listed
manufacturing companies. Ind. Econ. Res. 2022, 2, 43–56.
12. Hajli, M.; Sims, I.M.; Ibragimov, V. Information technology (IT) productivity paradox in the 21st century. Int. J. Product. Perform.
Manag. 2015, 64, 457–478. [CrossRef]
13. Qi, Y.D.; Cai, C.W. Research on the multiple effects of digitalization on the performance of manufacturing enterprises and its
mechanism. Study Explor. 2020, 7, 108–119.
14. Porter, M.E.; Linde, C.V.D. Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1995, 73, 120–134.
15. Guo, Y.; Xia, X.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, D. Environmental Regulation, Government R&D Funding and Green Technology Innovation:
Evidence from China Provincial Data. Sustainability 2018, 10, 940.
16. Hong, M.; Li, Z.; Drakeford, B. Do the Green Credit Guidelines Affect Corporate Green Technology Innovation? Empirical
Research from China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1682. [CrossRef]
17. Luo, Y.; Salman, M.; Lu, Z. Heterogeneous impacts of environmental regulations and foreign direct investment on green
innovation across different regions in China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 759, 143744. [CrossRef]
18. Yi, M.; Fang, X.; Wen, L.; Guang, F.; Zhang, Y. The Heterogeneous Effects of Different Environmental Policy Instruments on Green
Technology Innovation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4660. [CrossRef]
19. Lv, C.C.; Shao, C.H.; Li, J.J. Green technology innovation and financial development: Do environmental regulation and innovation
output matter? Energy Econ. 2021, 98, 105237. [CrossRef]
20. Tang, C.; Xu, Y.Y.; Hao, Y.; Wu, H.T.; Xue, Y. What is the role of telecommunications infrastructure construction in green technology
innovation? A firm-level analysis for China. Energy Econ. 2021, 103, 105576. [CrossRef]
21. Palčič, I.; Prester, J. Impact of Advanced Manufacturing Technologies on Green Innovation. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3499. [CrossRef]
22. Ma, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Yin, Q. Top management team faultlines, green technology innovation and firm financial performance. J.
Environ. Manag. 2021, 285, 112095. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Wang, F.Z.; Liu, X.L.; Zhang, L.; Cheng, W.C. Does digitalization promote green technology innovation in resource-based
enterprises? Stud. Sci. Sci. 2022, 40, 332–344.
24. Song, D.Y.; Zhu, W.B.; Ding, H. Can enterprise digitalization promote green technology innovation? —Based on the investigation
of listed companies in heavy pollution industries. J. Financ. Econ. 2022, 48, 34–48.
25. Li, D.K.Q.; Shen, W.T. Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and
Institutional Ownership. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13983. [CrossRef]
26. Ghasemaghaei, M.; Calic, G. Assessing the impact of big data on firm innovation performance: Big data is not always better data.
J. Bus. Res. 2020, 108, 147–162. [CrossRef]
27. Jin, F.; Qi, Z.H.; Liang, Y.L. Big Data, Financial Agglomeration and Green Technology Innovation. Rev. Econ. Manag. 2021, 37,
97–112.
28. Borowski, P.F. Innovation strategy on the example of companies using bamboo. J. Innov. Entrep. 2021, 10, 3–20. [CrossRef]
29. Baumann, J.; Kritikos, A.S. The link between R&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different? Res. Policy 2016, 45,
1263–1274.
30. Brown, J.R.; Martinsson, G.; Petersen, B.C. Do Financing Constraints Matter for R&D? Soc. Sci. Electron. Publ. 2012, 56, 1512–1529.
31. Yang, G.Z.; Xi, Y.T. An Empirical Study on Financing Constraints of Enterprise Green Technology Innovation Activities. J. Ind.
Technol. Econ. 2019, 38, 70–76.
32. Zhai, H.Y.; Liu, Y.S. Research on the relationship between digital finance development, financing constraints and enterprise green
innovation. Sci. Technol. Prog. Policy 2021, 38, 116–124.
33. Jiang, J.X.; Tang, Y.C.; Li, X.J. Digital Finance Empowers Green Innovation of New Energy Enterprises under the Background of
Double Carbon: Based on the Perspective of Financing Constraints. Contemp. Econ. Manag. 2022, 44, 1–19.
34. Yao, P.Y. Research on the impact path of government subsidies on the innovation of small and medium-sized enterprises. Technol.
Econ. 2022, 41, 26–37.
35. Wang, W.T.; Cao, D.D. Internet capital and high-quality development of private economy: Based on the perspective of enterprise
innovation-driven path. Stat. Res. 2020, 37, 72–84.
36. Li, W.J.; Zheng, M.N. Substantive innovation or strategic innovation?—The impact of macro-industrial policy on micro-enterprise
innovation. Econ. Res. J. 2016, 51, 60–73.
37. Wu, F.; Hu, H.Z.; Lin, H.Y.; Ren, X.Y. Enterprise digital Transformation and capital market performance: Empirical evidence from
stock liquidity. Manag. World 2021, 37, 15.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 7497 20 of 20

38. Hadlock, C.J.; Pierce, J.R. New Evidence on Measuring Financial Constraints: Moving Beyond the KZ Index. Rev. Financ. Stud.
2010, 23, 1909–1940. [CrossRef]
39. Zhao, T.; Zhang, Z.; Liang, S.K. Digital economy, entrepreneurial activity and high-quality development: Empirical evidence
from Chinese cities. Manag. World 2020, 36, 65–76.