Can Enterprise Digitalization Promote Green Technological Innovation? Evidence from China’s Manufacturing Sector

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript is focusing on the topic: Enterprise Digitalization Promote Green Technological Innovation? Evidence from China's Manufacturing Sector. The topic is not uncommon, and major deficiencies (as shape and content) identified must be addressed based on the specific recommendations below:

All the names of the authors should be written with same characters (not in uppercase).

Check the Instructions for authors regarding the Abstract’s length/ number of the words.

Last part of the Introduction. Please clarify what your research brings new/special aspects to the field. Develop the aim of the study as better as you can. What differentiate your paper from other in the same topic? Give a reason for interest in this paper.

iThenticate report is much too high (42%), especially for an original type of manuscript. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.

Check the Instructions for Authors regarding the structure for an Article and reshape/restructure the content accordingly. Check on the MDPI platform https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions , Research Manuscript Sections.

What is the Methodology (Materials and Methods for your research)?

Remove Italics from all tables. 

Citation must be inserted for each soft/ variant used in the research and all soft must be reminded/inserted.

Few ideas must be better developed. i.e. How can the technology transfer contribute to increasing the promotion of green technologies? I suggest checking and referring to  https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315728 and https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013121

Try to make a single table 9, not dividing it in 3. I never saw such kind of numbering tables in my entire career. Also, put the numerical values in their correct place in Table 9(2).

After Table 9(3), I suggest adding a new strong last paragraph of Discussion, where you must underline the strengths and limitations of your results/research.

Conclusions section is much too long; it must be more focused, not duplicating info already given in other sections and detailing the achievement of the aim of the study. It is not clear why this study was performed. Also, as I already mentioned, its structure is confusing for an original research.

Your omitted Author Contributions, Funding, Acknowledgments, Conflicts of Interest sections at the final of the manuscript. Check the Sustainability draft.

Author Response

Comment 1:

All the names of the authors should be written with same characters (not in uppercase).

Response 1:

Thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have changed the capital letter to lowercase. This change can be found-page1, line4.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 2:

Check the Instructions for authors regarding the Abstract’s length/ number of the words.

Response 2:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have condensed the abstract according to the journal's requirements. This change can be found-page 2,line 7-25.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 3:

Last part of the Introduction. Please clarify what your research brings new/special aspects to the field. Develop the aim of the study as better as you can. What differentiate your paper from other in the same topic? Give a reason for interest in this paper.

Response 3:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
(1) We have revised the paper to clarify the new contribution our research brings to the field. this change can be found-page 2,line 72-80.
(2) We have revised the paper to explain the purpose of our research in detail. this change can be found-page 2,line 81-85.
(3) We have revised the paper to clarify how our research differs from other papers on the same topic. this change can be found-page 2,line 85-90.
(4) We have revised the paper to explain why we are interested in this research. this change can be found-page 2,line 91-93.

Comment 4:

iThenticate report is much too high (42%), especially for an original type of manuscript. Revise the entire manuscript in this regard.

Response 4:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper and reduced the duplication rate.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

 

Comment 5:

Check the Instructions for Authors regarding the structure for an Article and reshape/restructure the content accordingly. Check on the MDPI platform https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions , Research Manuscript Sections.

Response 5:

tthank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper and adjusted the article structure according to the journal's requirements. This change can be found-page 4, line 182-209 \ page 16, line 570-632 and so on.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 6:

What is the Methodology (Materials and Methods for your research)?

Response 6:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper and further improved the research materials and methods. This change can be found-page 5,line 186-209.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 7:

Remove Italics from all tables.

Response 7:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper and removed the italics in the table. This change can be found-table1-9
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 8:

Citation must be inserted for each soft/ variant used in the research and all soft must be reminded/inserted.

Response 8:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper to indicate the software used in our study. This change can be found-page5,line 209,and so on.

Comment 9:

Few ideas must be better developed. i.e. How can the technology transfer contribute to increasing the promotion of green technologies? I suggest checking and referring to  https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315728 and https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013121

Response 9:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper. Based on your reminder and inspiration, we have initially formed some ideas for further research in the future, which are reflected in the paper. Future research will explore digital technologies, such as big data, artificial intelligence, and blockchain, from the perspective of technology transfer (TT), and explore how to comprehensively optimize all aspects of technology transfer, including the efficiency of knowledge sharing, the accuracy of technology evaluation, the precision of partner matching, and the simplicity of transaction processes, while improving corporate green technology innovation. In particular, the research will focus on how corporate digitalization promotes the overall process and actual effects of technology transfer (TT), especially in the key area of ​​​​green technology innovation. In addition, the research will also analyze its potential impact on accelerating green technology transfer and promoting the widespread application of green technology through the application of digital means. In this process, we will focus on how digital technology specifically affects the efficiency of green technology transfer, clarify the role and function of digital platforms in the process of green technology transfer, and actively explore whether there are specific digital tools or strategies that can significantly improve the success rate of green technology transfer, and provide scientific basis and practical guidance for the rapid development and widespread application of green technology. This change can be found-page17,line 616-633. Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 10:

Try to make a single table 9, not dividing it in 3. I never saw such kind of numbering tables in my entire career. Also, put the numerical values in their correct place in Table 9(2).

Response 10:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the paper and made Table 9 (1) (2) (3) into one table. This change can be found-page15,line 569.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 11:

After Table 9(3), I suggest adding a new strong last paragraph of Discussion, where you must underline the strengths and limitations of your results/research.

Response 11:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions. We've added a discussion section. This change can be found-page16,line 570---. Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 12:

Conclusions section is much too long; it must be more focused, not duplicating info already given in other sections and detailing the achievement of the aim of the study. It is not clear why this study was performed. Also, as I already mentioned, its structure is confusing for an original research.

Response 12:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have adjusted the structure and revised the conclusion section. We have deleted the duplicated parts. We have also made detailed revisions to the research objectives. This change can be found-page16,line 570-632.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 13:

Your omitted Author Contributions, Funding, Acknowledgments, Conflicts of Interest sections at the final of the manuscript. Check the Sustainability draft.

Response 13:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have added the description of author contributions, funding projects, acknowledgements and whether there are conflicts of interest. This change can be found-page17,line635-647.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The abstract part introduces too much background, and the whole part needs to be streamlined; in the abstract part, it is recommended to replace the innovation written in the article with greentechnology and GreenTechnology; the last paragraph of the abstract is recommended to replace the suggestions put forward in this study.

 

2. In the introduction part, the author wrote two marginal contributions, which is a bit repetitive, and it is recommended to modify it. The introduction needs to cite more research from other scholars to highlight the author's contribution.

 

3. In the theoretical basis and research hypothesis part, some research hypotheses lack theoretical support.

 

4. Why did the author choose manufacturing enterprises as samples? From the full text, even if other enterprises are selected, it seems that such a conclusion can be obtained, which cannot reflect the uniqueness of manufacturing enterprises.

 

5. The mechanism test selects the indicators mentioned in the article, such as representative capital optimization and executive green awareness. It is recommended to explain the reason and source.

 

6. In the heterogeneity test, it is necessary to explain the reason and necessity for this step of heterogeneity test. As for why the threshold effect test is used in the enterprise scale heterogeneity test, there is no footer in the front of the article.

 

7. Manufacturing enterprises are not mentioned in the research conclusions and policy recommendations. The research results of this article are based on manufacturing enterprises, and policy recommendations should be related to manufacturing enterprises.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English should be more standardized and use academic and professional terms

Author Response

Comment 1:

1. The abstract part introduces too much background, and the whole part needs to be streamlined; in the abstract part, it is recommended to replace the innovation written in the article with greentechnology and GreenTechnology; the last paragraph of the abstract is recommended to replace the suggestions put forward in this study.

Response 1:

 

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have streamlined the Abstract. We have replaced the words "innovation" with "green technology". The recommendations made in this study are stated in the last paragraph of the Abstract. This change can be found-page1,line7-25.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 2:

2. In the introduction part, the author wrote two marginal contributions, which is a bit repetitive, and it is recommended to modify it. The introduction needs to cite more research from other scholars to highlight the author's contribution.

Response 2:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have deleted the duplicate content and introduced more references from scholars to further enrich the introduction. This change can be found-page1,2,line30,43,57,64,68.
Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Commment 3:

3. In the theoretical basis and research hypothesis part, some research hypotheses lack theoretical support.

Response 3:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
We have introduced more references from scholars to further support the hypothesis proposed. This change can be found-page3,line98,112,115,132,138 and page4,line141,161,164,169.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 4:

4. Why did the author choose manufacturing enterprises as samples? From the full text, even if other enterprises are selected, it seems that such a conclusion can be obtained, which cannot reflect the uniqueness of manufacturing enterprises.

Response 4:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions. We have stated why we chose manufacturing for our research. Choosing manufacturing companies for research is of great significance and unique value. First, the manufacturing industry has complex production processes, and digitization can accurately reduce consumption. A-share companies are large in scale and have strong influence. Studying them will help explore efficient energy -saving models and provide examples for other industries. Secondly, the manufacturing industry consumes a lot of resources. The data of A-share companies is easy to obtain and standardized. Studying their digital resource utilization can achieve green and efficient results. Finally, the manufacturing industry has a fast product replacement. Studying A-share companies can grasp digitalization to promote green product innovation, meet market demand, and promote the green development of the industry. this change can be found-page5,line188-197 Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 5:

5. The mechanism test selects the indicators mentioned in the article, such as representative capital optimization and executive green awareness. It is recommended to explain the reason and source.

Response 5:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
Our study selected human capital optimization and business model innovation as mediating variables, and we further explained the reasons and sources for choosing them. This change can be found-page10,line384-387 and page11,line424-428.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 6:

6. In the heterogeneity test, it is necessary to explain the reason and necessity for this step of heterogeneity test. As for why the threshold effect test is used in the enterprise scale heterogeneity test, there is no footer in the front of the article.

Response 6:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, We have made detailed revisions.
（1）We further explained the reason and necessity of heterogeneity test. Different manufacturing companies differ in many aspects, such as green awareness of senior executives, access to green credit, pollution levels in their industries, technological innovation levels, and company size. These differences can lead to different effects of digitalization on green technology innovation. Through heterogeneity tests, we can gain a deeper understanding of the role of digitalization in companies with different characteristics and provide more targeted advice to companies and policymakers.this change can be found-page12,line458-464 .
（2）We further explained the reason for using the threshold effect model to test the heterogeneity of the threshold effect of enterprise size. The relationship between enterprise digital transformation and green technology innovation may not be a strictly linear relationship, and there may be a threshold effect related to enterprise size. Through the threshold effect test, the threshold value of enterprise size can be determined, and then the impact of digitalization on green technology innovation in different scale ranges can be analyzed. This helps to more accurately grasp the impact of enterprise size on the effect of digitalization on promoting green technology innovation, so as to formulate differentiated policies for enterprises of different sizes and improve the effectiveness and accuracy of policies. found-page15,line545-552. Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 7:

7. Manufacturing enterprises are not mentioned in the research conclusions and policy recommendations. The research results of this article are based on manufacturing enterprises, and policy recommendations should be related to manufacturing enterprises.

Response 7:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have revised the content for manufacturing enterprises in the research conclusions and policy recommendations. This change can be found-page16,line572-600.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

We further polished the paper, further standardized the English, and adjusted it to academic and professional terms.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

From the paper, I did not understand whether the special fund for ecological technological innovation should be created as an amount for the entire industry of a country or should it be created as a percentage of the turnover for a specific product.

Author Response

Comment :

From the paper, I did not understand whether the special fund for ecological technological innovation should be created as an amount for the entire industry of a country or should it be created as a percentage of the turnover for a specific product.

Response :

There are significant advantages to setting up special funds from the perspective of the total amount of the entire industry in the country. On the one hand, this approach can start from the macro level, comprehensively coordinate resources, and make strategic arrangements for the green technology innovation and development of the entire industry. Through large-scale capital investment, it can support the research and development of key common technologies in the industry, overcome the technical difficulties faced by the industry as a whole, and thus promote the green technology innovation level of the entire industry. For example, concentrated funds to support the research and development of key technologies such as energy conservation and emission reduction and resource recycling in the manufacturing industry will help achieve the green transformation of the entire manufacturing industry. On the other hand, it is conducive to integrating various innovative resources in the industry, promoting cooperation between enterprises, scientific research institutions and universities, and forming a good situation of collaborative innovation.
Setting up special funds in the form of a percentage of the turnover of specific products also has unique advantages. It can focus more accurately on specific products and encourage enterprises to carry out ecological technology innovation on these products. In order to improve the competitiveness of their products, enterprises will invest funds more specifically in the research and development of ecological technologies related to the product, prompting enterprises to integrate green concepts into product design, production processes and other links. For example, for some high-energy consumption and high-pollution products, through the establishment of such special funds, enterprises can be guided to develop more environmentally friendly production technologies and reduce the negative impact of products on the environment.
However, the specific method to be chosen requires comprehensive consideration of many factors, including the industry's development stage, product characteristics, policy objectives, and the availability of funds. In future policy formulation and practice, it may be possible to flexibly choose or combine the two methods according to the actual conditions of different industries and products to achieve the best effect in promoting ecological technology innovation.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors improved their manuscript.

Author Response

thank you very much.

We have further adjusted the logical relationship between the research findings, discussion and policy recommendations. This change can be found-page18,line651-675.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 1.The abstract lacks a description of the research methodology

2. Please describe the situation of the sample (i.e. adding descriptive statistics and conducting a brief analysis of the basic situation of the sample)

3. Please briefly explain the basis for selecting control variables

4. It is suggested that Chapter 7 should be more aligned with the manufacturing industry and discussed in conjunction with its characteristics

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Suggest reading the entire text again and carefully checking for grammar, punctuation, and the use of proper nouns

Author Response

 Comment 1:

1.The abstract lacks a description of the research methodology

Response 1:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have added the research methodology of this article in the abstract. This change can be found-page18,line10-12.

please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 2:

2. Please describe the situation of the sample (i.e. adding descriptive statistics and conducting a brief analysis of the basic situation of the sample)

Response 2:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have added descriptive statistics of the sample. This change can be found-page7,line314-326.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 3:

3. Please briefly explain the basis for selecting control variables

Response 3:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have explained the rationale for choosing these control variables. This change can be found-page7,line295-310.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

Comment 4:

4. It is suggested that Chapter 7 should be more aligned with the manufacturing industry and discussed in conjunction with its characteristics

Response 4:

thank you for pointing this. We agree this comment. Therefore, we have made detailed revisions.
We have made further discussion in Section 7 based on the characteristics of manufacturing industry. This change can be found-page7,line295-310.

Please view the uploaded revised Manuscript, the point is marked in red.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf