Corporate digital sustainability: Dimension exploration, scale development and testing

Li Xueling, Zhang Xiang, Kui Yuming, Xiao Jing

Science Research Management ›› 2025, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (11) : 1-11.

PDF(1316 KB)
PDF(1316 KB)
Science Research Management ›› 2025, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (11) : 1-11. DOI: 10.19571/j.cnki.1000-2995.2025.11.001  CSTR: 32148.14.kygl.2025.11.001

Corporate digital sustainability: Dimension exploration, scale development and testing

Author information +
History +

Abstract

The convergence of corporate digitalization and sustainability is a new context and hot topic in today's academic research. However, there is still a lack of consensus among academics on the concept, dimensions and measurement of the variables of corporate digital sustainability. This study aims to construct a measurement system for corporate digital sustainability. Firstly, on the basis of reviewing existing studies on the connotation of corporate digital sustainability, the concept of corporate digital sustainability was defined in terms of "digital first" and "digitally-enabled", and its characteristics of integration, long-term and scalability were refined; second, a rooted approach was adopted to develop a methodology for measuring enterprise digital sustainability, which is based on the concept of "digital sustainability". Secondly, we adopted a rooted approach to develop a conceptual model of corporate digital sustainability centered on "digital asset sustainability, digital economic value, digital social responsibility and digital environmental management". Finally, we developed an initial scale for measuring corporate digital sustainability, and after a series of analysis and testing, we finally established a second-order, four-factor, fifteen-question optimal measurement model of corporate digital sustainability. In addition, the predictive validity test showed that the scale is a good predictor of corporate competitive advantage. The study will help to make up for the lack of existing research scales on corporate digital sustainability, not only laying a solid foundation for quantitative research on corporate digital sustainability, but also providing a useful reference for the implementation of corporate digital sustainability in the real world in the Chinese context.

Key words

corporate digital sustainability / conceptual dimension / scale development / grounded theory / competitive advantage

Cite this article

Download Citations
Li Xueling , Zhang Xiang , Kui Yuming , et al. Corporate digital sustainability: Dimension exploration, scale development and testing[J]. Science Research Management. 2025, 46(11): 1-11 https://doi.org/10.19571/j.cnki.1000-2995.2025.11.001

References

[1]
GEORGE G, MERRILL R K, SCHILLEBEECKX S J D. Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship: How digital innovations are helping tackle climate change and sustainable development[J]. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2021, 45(5):999-1027.
We explore how digital technologies are helping address grand challenges to tackle climate change and promote sustainable development. With digital technologies, entrepreneurial organizations have adopted innovative approaches to tackle seemingly intractable societal challenges. We refer to these broadly as digital sustainability activities. By focusing on the digital toolbox employed by pioneering organizations, we propose a research agenda that generates novel questions for entrepreneurship, business models, and ecosystems as well as new ways of thinking about trust and institutional logics. We believe that digital sustainability can spur empirical advances in entrepreneurship, innovation, and strategy with potential for positive impact on society.
[2]
PAN S L, CARTER L, TIM Y, et al. Digital sustainability, climate change, and information systems solutions: Opportunities for future research[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2022, 63:102444.
[3]
GUANDALINI I. Sustainability through digital transformation:A systematic literature review for research guidance[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2022,148:456-471.
[4]
YORK J G, VEDULA S, LENOX M J. It's not easy building green: The impact of public policy, private actors, and regional logics on voluntary standards adoption[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2018, 61(4): 1492-1523.
[5]
ELKINGTON J. Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development[J]. California Management Review, 1994, 36 (2): 90-100.
[6]
PAN S L, ZHANG S. From fighting COVID-19 pandemic to tackling sustainable development goals: An opportunity for responsible information systems research[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2020,55: 102196.
[7]
BASKERVILLE R L, MYERS M D, YOO Y. Digital first: The ontological reversal and new challenges for information systems research[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2020, 44(2):509-523.
The classical view of an information system is that it represents and reflects physical reality. We suggest this classical view is increasingly obsolete: digital technologies are now creating and shaping physical reality. We call this phenomenon the ontological reversal. The ontological reversal is where the digital version is created first, and the physical version second (if needed). This ontological reversal challenges us to think about the role of humans and technology in society. It also challenges us to think about our role as IS scholars in this digital world and what it means for our research agendas.
[8]
STUERMER M, ABU-TAYEH G, MYRACH T. Digital sustainability: Basic conditions for sustainable digital artifacts and their ecosystems[J]. Sustainability Science, 2017, 12(2):247-262.
The modern age has heralded a shift from the industrial society, in which natural resources are crucial input factors for the economy, towards a knowledge society. To date, sustainability literature has treated knowledge-and in particular digital artifacts-mainly as a means to the end of achieving sustainable development. In this conceptual paper, we argue that digital artifacts themselves ought also to be considered as resources, which also need to be sustainable. While over-consumption is a problem facing natural resources, with sustainable digital artifacts, underproduction, and underuse are the biggest challenges. In our view, the sustainability of digital artifacts improves their potential impact on sustainable development. A theoretical foundation for digital artifacts and their ecosystem allows us to present the relevant research on digital information, knowledge management, digital goods, and innovation literature. Based on these insights, we propose ten basic conditions for sustainable digital artifacts and their ecosystem to ensure that they provide the greatest possible benefit for sustainable development. We then apply those characteristics to four exemplary cases: Linux kernel development, Bitcoin cryptocurrency, the Wikipedia project, and the Linking Open Drug Data repositories. The paper concludes with a research agenda identifying topics for sustainability scholars and information systems academics, as well as practitioners. A number of suggestions for future studies on digital sustainability are also put forward.
[9]
FALCKE L, ZOBEL A, YOO Y, et al. Digital sustainability strategies: Digitally enabled and digital-first innovation for net zero[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2024, 38(3):415-436.
[10]
LUO R. Global digital sustainability: A cross-disciplinary approach[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2024, https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2023.0182.
[11]
GREGORI P, HOLZMANN P. Digital sustainable entrepreneurship: A business model perspective on embedding digital technologies for social and environmental value creation[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 272:122817.
[12]
KHAN I S, AHMAD M O, MAJAVA J. Industry 4.0 and sustainable development:A systematic mapping of triple bottom line, circular economy and sustainable business models perspectives[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021,297:126655.
[13]
LIU Y, ZHU Q, SEURING S. New technologies in operations and supply chains:Implications for sustainability[J]. International Journal of Production Economics, 2020,229:107889-107889.
[14]
WIELGOS D M, HOMBURG C, KUEHNL C. Digital business capability: Its impact on firm and customer performance[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2021, 49(4): 762-789.
[15]
YU Y, ZHANG J Z, CAOY, et al. Intelligent transformation of the manufacturing industry for industry 4.0: Seizing financial benefits from supply chain relationship capital through enterprise green management[J]. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2021,172:120999.
[16]
LI L. Digital transformation and sustainable performance: The moderating role of market turbulence[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2022, 104:28-37.
[17]
PORTER M E, KRAMER M R. Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2006, 84(12):78-92.
[18]
LOBSCHAT L, MUELLERB, EGGERS F, et al. Corporate digital responsibility[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2021,122:875-888.
[19]
阳镇, 陈劲. 数智化时代下企业社会责任的创新与治理[J]. 上海财经大学学报, 2020, 22(6):33-51.
YANG Zhen, CHEN Jin. Innovation and governance of corporate social responsibility in the digital and intelligent era[J]. Journal of Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, 2020, 22(6):33-51.
[20]
邢小强, 汤新慧, 王珏, 等. 数字平台履责与共享价值创造:基于字节跳动扶贫的案例研究[J]. 管理世界, 2021, 37(12):152-176.
XING Xiaoqiang, TANG Xinhui, WANG Jue, et al. The responsibility taking and shared value creation of digital platform enterprises:A case study on the poverty alleviation of Bytedance[J]. Journal of Management World, 2021, 37(12):152-176.
[21]
CEGARRA-NAVARRO J G, PAPA A, GARCIA-PEREZ A, et al. An open-minded strategy towards eco-innovation: A key to sustainable growth in a global enterprise[J]. Technological Forecasting &Social Change, 2019,148:119727.
[22]
BEIER G, ULLRICH A, NIEHOFF S, et al. Industry 4.0: How it is defined from a sociotechnical perspective and how much sustainability it includes: A literature review[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020,259:120856.
[23]
庞瑞芝, 王宏鸣. 数字经济与城市绿色发展:赋能还是负能?[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(7):1397-1408.
Abstract
在“数字中国”和“美丽中国”的建设进程中,本文以2011-2019年全国274个地级及以上城市的平衡面板数据为样本,在剖析数字经济自身特性的基础上,从作用机制与门槛效应两方面探讨了数字经济对城市绿色发展的影响。研究发现:数字经济显著促进了城市绿色发展,并且这种促进作用在东部城市、智慧城市试点城市以及知识产权保护力度强的城市中更为明显。进一步研究表明,数字经济可以通过推动经济结构服务化、激励绿色技术创新、提升公众环境关注度促进城市绿色发展。随着当前数字基础设施的广泛建设,社会用电量和碳排放不断增加,数字经济对城市绿色发展的的影响存在边际效应递减的非线性特征。本文的研究结论在积极推动城市拥抱绿色发展新范式的同时,也为构建集约化、低碳化的现代基础设施体系,实现数字化绿色化协同发展提供了有益借鉴。
PANG Ruizhi, WANG Hongming. Digital economy and urban green development:Empowerment or negative energy?[J]. Studies in Science of Science, 2024, 42(7):1397-1408.
In the process of the construction of "Digital China" and "Beautiful China", this paper takes the balanced panel data of 274 cities at prefecture level and above in China from 2011 to 2019 as samples, and on the basis of analyzing the characteristics of digital economy itself, discusses the impact of digital economy on urban green development from two aspects of action mechanism and threshold effect. The study found that digital economy significantly promoted urban green development, and this promoting effect was more obvious in eastern cities, smart city pilot cities and cities with strong intellectual property protection. Further research shows that digital economy can promote urban green development by promoting the servitization of economic structure, stimulating green technology innovation and enhancing public environmental concern. With the extensive construction of the current digital infrastructure, social electricity consumption and carbon emissions continue to increase, and the impact of digital economy on urban green development has a non-linear feature of diminishing marginal effect. The research conclusions of this paper not only actively promote cities to embrace the new paradigm of green development, but also provide a useful reference for the construction of an intensive and low-carbon modern infrastructure system and the realization of digital green coordinated development.
[24]
史丹. 数字经济条件下产业发展趋势的演变[J]. 中国工业经济, 2022(11):26-42.
SHI Dan. Evolution of industrial development trend under digital economy[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2022(11):26-42.
[25]
曹裕, 李想, 胡韩莉, 等. 数字化如何推动制造企业绿色转型?:资源编排理论视角下的探索性案例研究[J]. 管理世界, 2023, 39(3):96-112+126+113.
CAO Yu, LI Xiang, HU Hanli, et al. How does digitalization drive the green transformation in manufacturing companies?An exploratory case study from the perspective of resource orchestration theory[J]. Journal of Management World, 2023, 39(3):96-112+126+113.
[26]
HE G, PAN Y, PARK A, et al. Reducing single-use cutlery with green nudges: Evidence from China's food-delivery industry[J]. Science, 2023, 381(6662), 1064.
[27]
GHOBAKHLOO M. Industry 4.0, digitization, and opportunities for sustainability[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020,252:119869.
[28]
BENCSIK B, PALMIÉ M, PARIDA V, et al. Business models for digital sustainability: Framework, microfoundations of value capture, and empirical evidence from 130 smart city services[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 160, 113757.
[29]
孙永磊, 宋晶, 陈劲. 创新网络惯例的维度探索与测度研究[J]. 科研管理, 2020, 41(11):56-65.
SUN Yonglei, SONG Jing, CHEN Jin. Dimensional exploration and measurement research of network routines[J]. Science Research Management, 2020, 41(11):56-65.
[30]
孙新波, 张媛, 王永霞, 等. 数字价值创造:研究框架与展望[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2021, 43(10):35-49.
SUN Xinbo, ZHANG Yuan, WANG Yongxia. Digital value creation: Research framework and prospects[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2021, 43(10):35-49.
[31]
PAGANI M. Digital business strategy and value creation: Framing the dynamic cycle of control points[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2013, 37(2):617-632.
Within changing value networks, the profits and competitive advantages of participation reside dynamically at control points that are the positions of greatest value and/or power. The enterprises that hold these positions have a great deal of control over how the network operates, how the benefits are redistributed, and how this influences the execution of a digital business strategy. This article is based on a field study that provides preliminary, yet promising, empirical evidence that sheds light on the dynamic cycle of value creation and value capture points in digitally enabled networks in response to triggers related to technology and business strategy. The context used is that of the European and U.S. broadcasting industry. Specifically, the paper illustrates how incremental innovations may shift value networks from static, vertically integrated networks to more loosely coupled networks, and how cross-boundary industry disruptions may then, in turn, shift those to two-sided markets. Based on the analysis, insights and implications for digital business strategy research and practice are then provided.
[32]
OLOGEANU-TADDEI R, HÖNIGSBERG S, WERITZ P, et al. The relationship of digital transformation and corporate sustainability: Synergies and tensions[J]. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2025, 210, 123809.
[33]
YE F, ZHENG J, LI Y, et al. Exploring the fusion of greening and digitalization for sustainability[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 442, 141085.
[34]
LEE Y K, KIM S H, SEO M K. Franchise core competency and its relationship with environmental uncertainty, competitive advantage, and financial performance: An empirical assessment of food-service franchise firms[J]. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 2015, 20(10):1151-1173.
PDF(1316 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/