Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Green technological innovation, green finance, and financial development

and their role in green total factor productivity: Empirical insights
from China
Chen Jiakui a, Jaffar Abbas b, Hina Najam c, Jiani Liu d, *, Jawad Abbas e
a
School of Economics and Management (Cooperative college), Qingdao Agricultural University, Qingdao, China
b
School of Media and Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 200240, Shanghai, China
c
Department of Business Administration, Iqra University, Islamabad, Pakistan
d
Wuhan Business University, Wuhan, China
e
Faculty of Management Sciences, University of Central Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling Editor: Cecilia Maria Villas Bôas de Considering the environmental deterioration challenges and a sharp decline in the quality and quantity of natural
Almeida resources, the need for capitalizing on renewable energy sources and environment-friendly practices has
increased a lot. The United Nations also has urged firms to shift their reliance on fossil fuels to renewable and
Keywords: eco-friendly practices. Several nations have begun shifting from economic growth to green productivity prac­
Green productivity
tices, such as green finance, green innovation, etc., which signifies collaboration between the economy, re­
Green finance
sources, and ecological development to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs). This study is based on a
Financial development
Green innovation comprehensive index of green finance development. Using the nonparametric data envelopment analysis and
directional distance function (DEA-DFF) model, it examines the impact of green finance, financial development
and green technology innovation (GTI) on green total factor productivity (GTFP) in 28 Chinese provinces from
2011 to 2021. The findings indicate that green finance raises the degree of green productivity significantly. Other
elements, such as financial development and technological innovation, contribute significantly to green pro­
duction. It is also found that establishing green finance legislation can help accelerate the growth of green
finance. The empirical findings in this study have policy implications for China’s environmental and green
finance planning. This study is among the pioneer investigations integrating green finance, financial develop­
ment, and green technology innovation into a unified research framework.

1. Introduction
Since the 1960s, the ecological disaster and resource depletion rep­
resented by total heating (Fu et al., 2022), land issues (Yang et al.,
2022), resource reduction (Abbas and Dogan, 2022), and environmental
squalor have evolved into global concerns that must be addressed
promptly (Chien et al., 2021). The world is facing increasing challenges,
such as food crises, global warming, resource depletion, environmental
pollution, etc. (Pan et al., 2022; Shao et al., 2022). To counter these
challenges, the United Nations established 17 Sustainable Development
Goals (SDG), such as Climate Action, Affordable and Renewable Energy,
Life on Land, etc. (UNDP, 2021). However, despite multiple efforts and
pledges by nations to tackle the environmental challenges, the world has
experienced a 60% increase in CO2 emissions since the United Nations
convention on climate change was signed in 1992 (IEA, 2022), and 2020
was among the top three warmest years on record (Lindsey and Dahl­
man, 2022). This signifies the need for constructive measures for clean
and environment-friendly production activities. According to the IPCC
(2022) report, if regional governments remove subsidies from fossil
fuels, this alone could bring down CO2 emissions by 4% and greenhouse
gas emissions by 10%, depending on the geographical situation of the
nation.
Considering this situation, numerous countries have started to
advance their green economies (Lu et al., 2022), which refer to the
management of the economy, resources, and environmental develop­
ment to adapt to a fluctuating worldwide climate and increasing
ecological dangers (Song et al., 2022). Green total factor productivity
(GTFP), in this sense, is a critical statistic for determining how

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jenny_leo@126.com (J. Liu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135131
Received 21 May 2022; Received in revised form 14 October 2022; Accepted 7 November 2022
Available online 16 November 2022
0959-6526/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Jiakui et al.
successfully a country solves environmental issues, recovers ecological
performance (Najam et al., 2022), and promotes long-term financial
growth (Goodwin et al., 2022). As a result, how to boost green output
evolution is widely viewed as a critical issue for the next stage of
financial growth, appealing great consideration from politicians and
researchers (Goodwin et al., 2022; Pan et al., 2022).
China, the world’s largest developing and transition economy, had
made enormous economic growth since the late 1970s when it began its
reforms and opening up (Imran and Abbas, 2020; Shao and He, 2022).
However, developing strategies to boost green efficiency while
decreasing energy consumption, saving the economy, and supporting
economic growth have become crucial concerns for China (Li et al.,
2022). China is also committed to the 2015 Paris Climate Change Con­
ference to achieve the aim of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions before
2030. Developing a comprehensive green growth model would help
China address the financial and ecological challenges associated with
meeting the above obligations and provide solutions implemented in
China to assist other countries in transforming their economies and
promoting green development (Bhammar et al., 2021). This dilemma
motivates us to estimate GTFP and investigate the elements that affect it
in light of achieving a clean and green recovery.
The traditional total factor productivity index studies examine eco­
nomic growth sources without taking undesired output into account (Li
et al., 2022). However, recent studies propose the GTFP index, which
considers energy constraints and environmental performance (Liu et al.,
2022). Considering the environmental performance aspect, this study
focuses on green finance and financial development and the associated
changes in green productivity in 28 Chinese provinces from 2011 to
2021. It also investigates the imperative role of green technological
innovation (GTI) in GTFP. The current research’s contributions can be
characterized as follows. First, it fills a vacuum in the literature by
investigating the relationship between green finance and green pro­
duction to raise awareness of the relevance of the green economy, in
contrast to the conventional approach, which considers green produc­
tivity by incorporating green finance development as a crucial influ­
encing factor on GTFP. Second, the role of green technological
innovation (GTI) along with financial development is studied in GTFP.
As a result, more detailed material about the reasons for green output
may be collected from the real and financial sectors. To better under­
stand the role of green finance development on the green economy, we
introduce a comprehensive index system that incorporates all aspects of
green-oriented credit, securities, insurance, and investment, rather than
relying on single-dimensional measures such as low-carbon financial
flows and the amount of green credit or investment. In terms of green
finance, the multidimensional index could provide a more comprehen­
sive appraisal of its progress. Third, in contrast to previous research on
traditional productivity, which has concentrated primarily on positive
output, the authors used the directional distance function (DDF) model
to examine negative yield and address the possible exclusion of energy
and environmental constraints. The multidimensional measure may
enable a more comprehensive evaluation of green finance development.
The remaining part of the paper is organized as follows. The next
section provides a literature review of prior studies. The empirical
model, data and technique are introduced in Section 3. Section 4 dis­
cusses the results after doing the analysis. After that, in the last section
conclusion and policy implications are presented.
2. Literature review
2.1. Green total factor productivity (GTFP)
GTFP is a modern productivity index that examines economic growth
by considering input, output, and undesired outputs, such as energy
constraints, carbon emissions, and environmental resources (Li et al.,
2022; Liu et al., 2022). It aims to promote energy efficiency by lowering
energy consumption from the input side and excessive environmental
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131
harm from the output side (Li et al., 2022). GTFP can potentially reflect
the efficiency of energy development and use accurately. It also aids in
determining the economic growth that is conditional on the energy
consumption scale or energy use efficiency enhancement (Li et al., 2022;
Najam and Riaz Malik, 2021). The primary reason for increased GTFP in
the industrial sector is the effectiveness of technological innovation. The
effect of technological improvement on GTFP is steadily increasing (Li
et al., 2022). Energy and industrial structure adjustment depend more
on economic subjects’ resource endowment, whereas technical innova­
tion increases energy efficiency through technological advancement,
which has a more practical value (Imran and Abbas, 2020).
However, given the growing importance of environmental protection
to economic development, researchers must consider the quantity of
economic growth and its influence on the environment, which is one of
the core components of the United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals (UNSDGs) (Yu et al., 2022). The term "sustainable development"
refers to transitioning from an extended growth mode with a heavy
reliance on non-renewable inputs to an intensive growth model with a
lower input, a higher output, and less pollution to boost GTFP (Abbas,
2020a; F.S. Chien et al., 2021). The world faces multiple environmental
challenges, such as natural resource degradation, climate change, global
warming, pollution, etc. Almost every country’s economic expansion
has been accompanied by resource depletion, environmental pollution,
and ecological degradation (Wang et al., 2022).
2.2. Green finance and green total factor productivity
Although there is no universally accepted definition of green finance
as a new financial model, the literature provides three fundamental
descriptions. The first is environmental finance, which provides finan­
cial services to address practical issues such as environmental protec­
tion, pollution management, resource conservation, and other
environmentally friendly initiatives (Latif et al., 2022). According to the
second point of view, financial innovation employs various economic
methods and products to control environmental risks (Bhattacharyya,
2022). The third and most recent view is that it is a financial framework
that promotes environmentally-friendly investments and helps establish
an environmentally conscious society based on carbon financing (Zhao
et al., 2022).
Over the last few decades, increasing efforts have been made in the
literature to examine green finance using the aforementioned concepts
(Bhattacharyya, 2022; Lijing Lu et al., 2022; L Lu et al., 2022). These
studies are primarily concerned with conceptualizing green finance and
green credit policies. For example, it benefits financial resource alloca­
tion efficiency by moving money away from high-pollution enterprises
and into environmental protection industries (Al-Qudah et al., 2022),
thereby enhancing efficiency and environmental quality (Baloch et al.,
2021). Additionally, it emphasizes the critical importance of investing in
green financial capital and ecological control to reduce environmental
deterioration’s consequences (Xiao et al., 2022).
Green credit policy supports the ecological environment by pro­
moting industry restructuring (Bittencourt et al., 2021), allocating credit
resources, and counseling consumers and investors on their behavior
(Azhgaliyeva et al., 2020). Green finance influences environmental
performance in various ways, including capital aid, resource allocation,
and technical innovation (Zhang et al., 2022). The technical innovation
impact implies that green financing can offer outside lending provisions
to initiatives tangled in GTI operations, improve energy efficiency, and
eventually stimulate the growth of the green industry (Yoshino et al.,
2021) while minimizing environmental harm and pollution (Sun et al.,
2022; Liu et al., 2022). Thus, it is imperative to develop a green economy
in collaboration with the management to evaluate the impact of green
loans and subsidies on the green manufacturing revolution. Liu et al.
(2021) argued that government subsidies could lower the cost of capital
for enterprises, enhancing their motivation to innovate.
Since the focus of GTFP is on input and output, in the current
C. Jiakui et al.
phenomenon, green finance serves as an input aiming to promote
environment-friendly practices and revival of natural climate output by
minimizing CO2 emissions. It is argued that green finance promotes
energy efficiency by lowering excessive energy consumption from the
input side by minimizing reliance on fossil fuels and excessive envi­
ronmental harm from the output side. Thus, the following hypothesis is
proposed:
H1. Green finance is a significant positive predictor of green total
factor productivity in China
2.3. Financial development and green total factor productivity
The literature review indicates that financial development can help
economic progress by assembling investments, optimizing capital allo­
cation, and minimizing risk (Nawaz et al., 2021). Financial infrastruc­
ture may boost economic growth and influence energy demand
(Paramati et al., 2022). A higher level of financial development results in
the growth of the financial market, economic development (Abidin
et al., 2021) and an increase in investment capital (Hwang et al., 2022).
It supports the promotion of vehicle, real estate, and electrical appliance
consumption (Zhang et al., 2022). These services offered by the financial
sector contribute to increased carbon emissions due to rising societal
consumption and deteriorating environmental quality.
According to Shahbaz et al. (2022), two mechanisms connect
financial markets to investment activity and economic growth. First, it
entails established financial markets raising capital for high-return en­
terprises. Second, it increases efficiency. It demonstrates that financial
development enhances liquidity, diversifies assets, and channels finan­
cial resources to the most profitable enterprises. Financial development
influences power consumption in three ways: the wealth effect, the
business effect, and the direct effect. The direct impact is tied to the
environment of greater financial growth. Consumers may borrow money
more easily and at a lower cost to purchase durable items and consume a
great deal of energy (Khan et al., 2022). The business effect occurs when
financial development facilitates enterprises’ easy and cost-effective
access to financial resources (Xie et al., 2022). The wealth effect oc­
curs when higher economic security stimulates economic growth and
increases energy demand (Shahbaz et al., 2022).
Financial development may considerably help to protect the natural
environment. An enhanced financial system permits governments to
transfer funding to protect environmental programs (Ayayi and Wijesiri,
2022). Therefore, a better financial system is a source for improving
eco-friendly industrial technology, which leads to enhanced energy
infrastructure and a reduction in CO2 emissions (Khan et al., 2022).
Secondly, governments worldwide are reforming their industrial struc­
tures by introducing eco-friendly programs to avert environmental
destruction (Lijing Lu et al., 2022). A sustainable financial system is a
necessity for this. Moreover, publicly traded companies must closely
adhere to government rules about environmental protection, contrib­
uting to the solution of the problem of degradation of the environment
(Abbas, 2020a). Financial development is crucial in mitigating envi­
ronmental damage (Bhammar et al., 2021). Countries must enhance
their financial systems to reduce environmental damage (Olalere et al.,
2021).
Jiang and Ma (2019) examined the relationship between financial
development and environmental degradation and identified a positive
association between them in developed nations. However, there is little
evidence of a strong link between GTFP and financial development in
emerging nations. This research thus hypothesizes that;
H2. Financial development is a significant positive predictor of green
total factor productivity in China
2.4. Green technology innovation and green total factor productivity
Green technology adheres to the law of ecological economics and
3
Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131
prioritizes resource and energy conservation during innovation (Khan
and Abbas, 2022; Song et al., 2022). It reduces pollution and environ­
mental destruction during innovation (Sharma et al., 2021) and ensures
that technological innovation has the least ecologically negative impact
possible (Liu et al., 2021). GTI seeks to attain SDGs, resource allocation
and protect the environment (Qu and Liu, 2022). It reflects the external
environment and reduces the conflict that may occur during the
implementation process, eroding GTI’s strength (Wang et al., 2021).
Al-Qudah et al. (2022) found that implementing the "Green Credit
Guidelines" in 2012 benefited enterprise green patent production. In
their study, Khan et al. (2020) said that GTI fosters the development of
manufacturing technologies and the creation of new products, resulting
in significant efficiency gains. From the standpoint of the innovation
system, improving GTFP through technological innovation is to decrease
outflow in energy consumption through system transformation and then
increase energy TFP overall (Wang et al., 2021).
According to the classic model and endogenous development pro­
totypes, a sustainable economy primarily depends on technological
progression typically quantified in GTFP growth (Feng et al., 2021).
However, the associated measures overlook some societal benefits
associated with resources and environmental challenges (Zhang et al.,
2022). Their absence becomes most apparent when energy and the at­
mosphere become the principal restrictions on financial development. A
percentage of production inputs must be diverted to environmental
governance operations, resulting in erroneous policy direction (Xie
et al., 2022). This constraint can be eagerly addressed through the
concept of green output, which was introduced in the 1990s by the Asian
Productivity Organization (Feng et al., 2021). As a result, green effi­
ciency and output state boost output while improving the environment’s
performance (Fu et al., 2022; Lijing Lu et al., 2022). Since then, spe­
cialists have performed enormous research on determining nations’
sustainability by measuring green productivity growth.
GTI is a subcategory of technical innovation, which refers to man­
agement and technology innovation aimed toward environmental pro­
tection (Abbas and Sağsan, 2019). While some discoveries significantly
increase output, they do not reflect the outside consequences on the set
during the innovation process. For instance, GTI focuses exclusively on
increasing productivity in energy-intensive businesses (Bhammar et al.,
2021). Hence, numerous businesses adhere to the green philosophy and
pay increasing consideration to technological development and
ecological issues. Thus, this research proposes the following;
H3. Green technological innovation is a significant positive predictor
of green total factor productivity in China
3. Research methodology
3.1. Data analysis
The current study investigates cause-and-effect links using a posi­
tivist paradigm approach. This philosophy embodies traditional
research methods and presumptions that are more suited to quantitative
research than qualitative (Diener et al., 2000). It is critical to consider
resource and environmental limits when measuring GTFP, as indicated
in the preceding segment. As a general rule, GTFP is a ratio representing
a system’s total output divided by its components’ total inputs (Jiang
et al., 2021). It takes into account factors like energy use and pollution
created during production. Green finance, financial development, and
green technical innovation are the explanatory factors in the current
study.
The majority of prior studies have used a data transformation strat­
egy to account for undesirable outputs, which contradicts the actual
production process and may result in an erroneous assessment of green
productivity development. To assess energy efficiency or TFP, ap­
proaches like nonparametric data envelopment analysis (DEA) have
been proposed in the ongoing research of GTFP (Wang et al., 2021). The
C. Jiakui et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131

DEA-DDF model is used in this work to calculate GTFP. These evalua­
tions focus on decision-making units (DMUs) that make the same
product type. DEA delivers comprehensive data on DMUs’ performance
because it takes into account multiple production elements at once and
does not require the specification of a predetermined utility function
(Riccardi et al., 2012). In the computation of the GTFP, the input of the
means of production is normally taken into account; however, this study
focuses on the desirable and undesirable outputs. Input indicators
include labor, capital stock, and energy usage. The labor force is
measured by the number of urban jobs, while the perpetual inventory
assesses the capital stock. GDP measures the desired production of en­
ergy GTFP, while carbon dioxide emissions measure the undesirable
output. The study details are provided in Table 1. Moreover, the key
study vectors used in this research are given below. Aparicio et al.
(2015) also followed similar techniques to find dependent variable value
using DEA technique.
Xij ε ℛ+: ith input taken by the jth DMU, i = 1, 2 …. m, j = 1, 2 …. n
Yrj ε ℛ+: rth desirable output which produces by jth DMU, r = 1, 2, …q, j = 1,
2, …n
Ykj ε ℛ+: kth undesirable output produced by jth DMU, k = 1, …I, j = 1 … n
GTFP is the main study variable in the above equation, while green
finance, financial development and GTI are the independent variables
contributing to green development. Betas are the coefficients, and e is
the error term. The authors extend the theoretical paradigm in this study
by integrating other crucial factorss such as green finance, financial
development and GTI affecting GTFP. This study used a balanced panel
dataset covering 28 Chinese provinces from 2011 to 2021, considering
data availability and validity. The data is compiled through the China
Statistical Yearbook of the Environment (https://www.chinayearbooks.
com/china-statistical-yearbook-on-environment-2021.html), the China
Statistical Yearbook of Science and Technology (https://www.chinaye
arbooks.com/tags/china-statistical-yearbook-on-science-and-technolo
gy), and the China Statistical Yearbook of various Provinces (www.
chinayearsbook.com) using STATA 13.1 software (Liu et al., 2021).
Researchers actively use STATA for automated reporting in social sci­
ence and other fields. It helped the authors to conduct the DEA and DDF
analysis. The same application facilitated the research in the partial
ordinary least square (POLS), random effect, fixed effect and generalized
method of moments analyses.
4. Results and discussion

Accordingly, the DEA function can be defined as follows: The authors begin by performing a descriptive analysis of the studied
variables. Table 2 shows the summary statistics of the study variables in

{( ) }
F= x, yd , yu ∶Σzk yqk ≥ ym , q = 1…..q, Σzk yurk = yuj , r = 1…..J, Σzk xnk ≤ xn , = 1…..N, zk ≥ 0, k = 1……..K (1)

the form of mean, median, standard deviation, minimum, maximum and

total observations. Following that, the authors performed pooled ordi­
Equation (1) shows the functional model of DEA in which different nary least square (POLS) test. One of the benefits of POLS is that even in
inputs and outputs are given in the form of study vectors. Zk shows all the presence of time-constant features, it can still be employed to obtain
those variables used to enlarge or squeeze the possible combination of impartial and consistent parameter estimates. Moreover, random effect
the DMUs to create the possible inputs and outputs. X shows the study (RE), fixed effect (FE), and generalized method of movement (GMM)
inputs; yd indicates the desirable outputs, while yu indicates the unde­ analyses were also performed. According to Bell et al. (2019), the mean
sirable study output in the DEA function above. After estimating the of a distribution of effects is estimated by a RE and a FE attempt to es­
value of GTFP through the DDF model, regression analysis is done to timate a single effect that is assumed to be common to all studies. Under
examine the impact of study variables on GTFP. The econometric model the RE model, study weights are more even than under the FE approach.
is given below. Similarly, the GMM is a technique for creating estimators comparable to
maximum likelihood. Compared to maximum likelihood, GMM is more
GTFPi,t = β0 + β1 GFi,t + β2 FDi,t + β3 GTIi,t + e (2)
robust due to its use of assumptions about individual moments of the
random variables rather than assumptions about the entire distribution.
The results of POLS, RE, FE, and GMM are provided in Table 3.
Table 1 Concerning the primary explanatory variable, the table results
Details of study variables. indicate that the coefficients of the study variables are significantly
Variables Definition References positive, meaning that the growth of green finance can increase the level
Dependent Variable of green output and growth. In the case of POLS, green finance’s impact
Green Total Factor This is measured through the DEA DDF (Li et al., 2022; on GTFP is significantly positive, with a beta value of 1.9616, p < 0.1
Productivity model. Liu et al., 2022) (See Fig. 1). In the case of random and fixed effects, the beta value be­
Inputs: Labor force, capital stock, tween green finance and GTFP is 1.3639, p < 0.05 and 1.6636, p < 0.05,
Energy input
respectively. However, among the four techniques, the GMM model
Output: Economic output in the form of
GDP shows the most significant relationship between green finance and
Undesirable output: Environmental GTFP, with a beta value of 1.9161, p < 0.001. This led to the acceptance
pollution in the form of CO2 emission. of hypothesis 1, i.e., “green finance is a significant positive predictor of
Independent Variables
green total factor productivity in China.” This result aligns with Spash
Green Finance A comprehensive index of green (Liu et al., 2021)
finance in the form of green credit,
(2020), demonstrating that green outlay and growth can make a win-
green investment and green securities. win situation for the ecology and the economy; hence, there is a dire
Financial The ratio of net inflows of financial Zhao et al. (2020) need to promote green economic growth and recovery. The findings also
Development development to GDP relate to Lee and Lee’s (Lee and Lee, 2022) study, stating that green
Green Green patent applications, including Hsu et al. (2021)
productivity increases due to the maturation of the green finance sector.
Technological green invention patents and green
Innovation utility model patents However, the impact is greater when economic, social, and environ­
mental conditions are optimal. As a result, China’s central government
Note: This table shows the study variables’ details in their definition, mea­
should prioritize overcoming the financial limitations businesses
surement and references.

4
C. Jiakui et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131

Table 2
Descriptive statistics.
Mean Median Maximum Minimum SD N

Green Total Factor Productivity 213571.11 6137.637 46755.55 − 1.333 54358.16 651
Green Finance 28432.57 7465.344 58865.56 1.211 53133.85 651
Financial Development 28377.71 7585.378 54153.38 1.111 34614.54 651
Green Technological Innovation 15756.64 5365.471 31744.87 − 5.443 67716.85 651

Note: this table shows the summary statistics of the study variables.

Technological advancement is critical for achieving long-term economic

Table 3
growth. Due to the considerable positive externalities associated with
Impact of study variables on GTFP.
financial support have become a driving force for GTFP. Financial
Variables POLS RE FE GMM development may effectively reduce friction in the economic system
Green Finance 1.9616* 1.3639** 1.6636** 1.9161*** through efficiency improvements and technical advancements and
(1.363) (3.7636) (6.3766) (6.7161) support GTFP growth. However, financial progress does not always have
Financial Development 1.7369** 1.6776** 1.6691** 1.7631**
a beneficial effect on capital allocation. Optimization of resources can
(13.999) (11.69) (3.1766) (3.1196)
Green Technological 1.1116** 1.1211* 1.1177** 1.1163**
encourage GTFP growth, while resource mismatches can limit GTFP
Innovation (6.1916) (1.1639) (3.6763) (6.671) growth.
Constant 9.6939** 7.9719** 6.1713* 1.6691** For the GTI, the random effect model shows that GTI has a significant
(11.6163) (7.7969) (1.7666) (1.7666) positive impact on GTFP with a beta value of 1.1211, p < 0.1. The other
R2 1.6616 1.6567 1.6769 1.6912
remaining models, like POLS, fixed effect and GMM, indicated a sig­
Obs. 651 651 651 651
nificant positive relationship with GTFP with beta values of 1.1116, p <
Notes: t statistics are in parenthesis; ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1. 0.05, 1.1177, p < 0.05 and 1.1163, p < 0.05, respectively. These results
suggest that GTI is also a major positive contributor to China’s GTFP.
encounter when engaging in environmentally friendly initiatives, Thus, the third hypothesis, i.e., “Green technological innovation is a
necessitating a well-designed green finance system. It is suggested to significant positive predictor of green total factor productivity in China.”
encourage and promote policies and plans that encourage green Wang et al. (2021) also reported a similar result in their study. GTI is
financing at the local and national levels. It motivates firms to opt for
such plans to achieve clean and green production and manufacturing
objectives. Such initiatives will engage firms in ecological and economic Table 4
actions that value green development. Heterogeneity analysis.
The POLS analysis of the financial development impact on GTFP Variables LGF HGF LFD HFD
indicated significant positive results with a beta value of 1.7369, p < DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
0.05. The random effect model also shows a significant positive rela­ GF 0.7487 2.7424*** 0.2287 4.0207***
tionship between financial development and GTFP with a beta value of (2.8472) (4.4274) (0.4724) (4.4042)
1.6776, p < 0.05. The two models, fixed effect and GMM, also indicated FD 0.8404 0.8802** 0.7470 0.8824**
(4.7478) (2.7427) (8.0477) (2.0774)
the significant positive impact of financial development on GTFP with a
GTI 0.0088 0.0447* 0.0042 0.0227**
beta value of 1.6691, p < 0.05 and 1.7631, p < 0.05, respectively. This (2.7044) (0.4447) (4.802) (0.2704)
finding suggests accepting the second hypothesis, i.e., “financial devel­ Constant 4.4472* 4.0808** 4.8787* 4.2728*
opment is a significant positive predictor of green total factor produc­ (2.2748) (2.4408) (4.888) (2.824)
tivity in China.” Mills et al. (2021) also found a similar result in their R2 0.7724 0.82 0.8722 0.7848
Obs. 300 351 300 351
financial development and dynamic energy efficiency study, focusing on
the Belt and Road economies. GTFP is impacted by financial develop­ Note: This table shows the findings of heterogeneity results. t statistics are in
ment primarily through technology advancement and capital allocation. parenthesis; ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.

Fig. 1. Impact of study variables on GTFP.

5
C. Jiakui et al.
Table 5
Robustness test.
Variables (1) (2)
GF 0.1848** 7.4878**
(7.7481) (7.7787)
FD DEVELOPMENT 0.8707** 0.7407**
(7.8787) (7.8417)
GTI 0.7774* 0.1748*
(1.4084) (0.1888)
Constant 7.7471* 4.1704**
(7.8784) (1.7807)
R2 0.4878 0.777
Obs. 651 651
Note: This table shows the findings of the robustness test. t statistics are in
parenthesis; ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.
critical for achieving high-quality economic development (Abbas,
2020b). Through information transmission and innovation investment,
GTI can provide sufficient momentum for GTFP, lowering transaction
and resource matching costs and enhancing national risk identification
and risk management capabilities. It also provides a new
quality-oriented framework for reserving excess funds for GTI. Financial
science and technology empowerment will result in the incubation of
many green industries, the cultivation of new economic growth poles,
and the promotion of China’s economy’s high-quality and SDGs.
Table 4 shows that the study sample is divided into low and high
green finance groups. On the other side, in the case of financial devel­
opment, two groups with low and high financial development were
created to make a comparison. The results are insignificant in the case of
low green finance and financial development. In contrast, on the
opposite side, a more significant positive relationship has been found
among the study variables. This table demonstrates that a high level of
green financing leads to more development and recovery (see Table 5).
4.1. Robustness test
Given that the impact of green finance varies according to the
measurements of green productivity metrics (Li et al., 2022), the authors
also undertake a secondary study utilizing a variety of environmental
variables, such as environmental governance and product quality. The
research demonstrates that green finance development significantly
impacts green production, notably ecological authority and environ­
mental excellence. In the above table, the first test is done with envi­
ronmental governance and an alternative proxy of GTFP. In the second
test, environmental quality is used as an alternative measure of GTFP.
Both findings showed the significant positive impact of study variables
on GTFP, illustrating the alignment of the robustness test with the main
study findings.
5. Conclusion, research implications and limitations
5.1. Practical and theoretical implications
The world recognizes the need to follow environment-friendly
practices each day. Nations have started paying attention to green
productivity to achieve sustainable development goals. The current
study makes multiple theoretical and practical contributions and offers
concrete suggestions for China’s long-term growth plans that have the
potential to comply with sustainable development objectives. The
empirical findings indicate that national green finance initiatives
significantly impact GTFP. The more a government promotes green
finance in its system, the higher its economy will experience
environment-friendly productivity, which will significantly help the
region achieve sustainability goals. Macro economically, the govern­
ment should reinforce its green finance policies and expedite the
development of sophisticated green financing infrastructure. This would
6
Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131
help to boost GTI, leading to improved GTFP. Additionally, authorities
should bolster the country’s SDG aim to increase the country’s absorp­
tive capacity and innovative potential via green finance. In terms of
procedures, the government should significantly encourage the expan­
sion of the green economy through economic and ecological regulations
to accomplish the dual goal of increasing productivity while improving
environmental performance, signifying green productivity (Zheng et al.,
2022). Micro-level mechanisms suggest that government should tighten
environmental laws, exciting initiatives to recover their production
processes, participate in GTI activities, and promote energy- and
emission-saving measures.
Similarly, as per the findings, financial development unambiguously
contributes directly to the enhancement of GTFP. The higher the degree
of financial development, the more capable it is of allocating resources
and responding to economic regulation and related industrial growth,
thereby promoting economic, efficient, stable, and green development
more rapidly and effectively. Thus, the government should take strong
measures to strengthen industry structure, transformation and upgrad­
ing, and green economic development. They should emphasize the
development of technological innovation and encourage private firms’
technological innovation activities. Enterprises properly employ money
to develop technological innovation to increase GTFP. The investment
structure of innovation should stay sensible to minimize resource
redundancy and maximize green productivity.
5.2. Research limitations and recommendations
Although this work fills a gap in the literature on the GTFP con­
cerning green finance, financial development, and GTI, several elements
remain unclear, representing the study’s limitations. Along with green
finance, financial development, and GTI, there are multiple other fac­
tors, such as environmental regulations, research and development,
technology transfer, foreign direct investment, etc., which could impact
GTFP and are ignored in the current study. Thus, future studies should
incorporate these aspects to have a more holistic and robust picture of
the situation. Future researchers could also look into the different di­
mensions and measurement tools of green recovery and productivity
and compare the countries since the current study focuses only on the
twenty-eight provinces of China. It is suggested to expand the current
investigation’s scope by including other regions or making a comparison
between different nations, such as the United States, Germany, Sweden,
etc.
5.3. Conclusion
Green finance, which integrates economic resources, and ecological
advances, is getting significant attention in the modern financial and
ecological literature. However, understanding the function of green
finance and financial development in effecting GTFP is fairly limited.
This study addresses a gap in the literature by developing a compre­
hensive index of green finance expansion and analyzing GTFP under
energy and environmental restraints. While classic TFP considers capi­
tal, labor inputs, and economic output, it excludes energy as input and
undesired output. In the GTFP, the goal is to maximize output while
minimizing environmental pollution for a given input. The authors
evaluated the impact of green finance and other study-related variables,
such as GTI and financial development, on GTFP in 28 Chinese provinces
between 2011 and 2021 and analyzed data using nonparametric DEA-
DDF models. Our empirical findings indicate that green finance, finan­
cial development and GTFP are increasing, indicating that economic
activities are becoming more effective, dynamic, and environmentally
friendly. Second, the results specify that the growth of GTI greatly in­
creases the green output. Third, green finance, GTI, and financial
development are more likely to positively impact green production in
provinces with higher financial development and green finance levels.
Finally, implementing an environment-friendly approach can amplify
C. Jiakui et al.
the beneficial effect of green finance, GTI, and financial development on
green production.
Funding
This research did not receive specific funding.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Chen Jiakui: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Proofreading.
Jaffar Abbas: Visualization, Validation, Investigation. Hina Najam:
Methodology, Data curation, Validation, Resources, Writing – original
draft, Software, Formal analysis. Jiani Liu: Project administration, Su­
pervision, Writing – review & editing. Jawad Abbas: Conceptualiza­
tion, Project administration, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Abbas, J., 2020a. Impact of total quality management on corporate green performance
through the mediating role of corporate social responsibility. J. Clean. Prod. 242,
118458 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118458.
Abbas, J., 2020b. HEISQUAL: a modern approach to measure service quality in higher
education institutions. Stud. Educ. Eval. 67 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
stueduc.2020.100933.
Abbas, J., Dogan, E., 2022. The impacts of organizational green culture and corporate
social responsibility on employees responsible behaviour towards the society.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20072-w.
Abbas, J., Sağsan, M., 2019. Impact of knowledge management practices on green
innovation and corporate sustainable development: a structural analysis. J. Clean.
Prod. 229, 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.024.
Abidin, Z., Prabantarikso, R.M., Wardhani, R.A., Endri, E., 2021. Analysis of bank
efficiency between conventional banks and regional development banks in
Indonesia. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business 8, 741–750.
Al-Qudah, A.A., Hamdan, A., Al-Okaily, M., Alhaddad, L., 2022. The impact of green
lending on credit risk: evidence from UAEs banks. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser.
https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-18224-5.
Aparicio, J., Pastor, J.T., Zofio, J.L., 2015. How to properly decompose economic
efficiency using technical and allocative criteria with non-homothetic DEA
technologies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 240, 882–891.
Ayayi, A.G., Wijesiri, M., 2022. Is there a trade-off between environmental performance
and financial sustainability in microfinance institutions? Evidence from South and
Southeast Asia. Bus. Strat. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2969.
Azhgaliyeva, D., Kapoor, A., Liu, Y., 2020. Green bonds for financing renewable energy
and energy efficiency in South-East Asia: a review of policies. J. Sustain. Finance
Invest. 10, 113–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2019.1704160.
Baloch, M.A., Ozturk, I., Bekun, F.V., Khan, D., 2021. Modeling the dynamic linkage
between financial development, energy innovation, and environmental quality: does
globalization matter? Bus. Strat. Environ. 30, 176–184. https://doi.org/10.1002/
bse.2615.
Bell, A., Fairbrother, M., Jones, K., 2019. Fixed and random effects models: making an
informed choice. Qual. Quantity 53, 1051–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-
018-0802-x.
Bhammar, H., Li, W., Molina, C.M.M., Hickey, V., Pendry, J., Narain, U., Bosak, K.,
Mccool, S.F., 2021. Framework for sustainable recovery of tourism in protected
areas. mdpi.com. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052798.
Bhattacharyya, R., 2022. Green finance for energy transition, climate action and
sustainable development: overview of concepts, applications, implementation and
challenges. Green Finance 4, 1–35.
Bittencourt, V.L., Alves, A.C., Leão, C.P., 2021. Industry 4.0 triggered by Lean Thinking:
insights from a systematic literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 59, 1496–1510.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1832274.
Chien, F., Chau, K.Y., Ady, S.U., Zhang, Y.Q., Tran, Q.H., Aldeehani, T.M., 2021. Does the
combining effects of energy and consideration of financial development lead to
environmental burden: social perspective of energy finance? Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Control Ser. 28, 40957–40970. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-13423-6.
Chien, F.S., Sadiq, M., Kamran, H.W., Nawaz, M.A., Hussain, M.S., Raza, M., 2021. Co-
movement of energy prices and stock market return: environmental wavelet nexus of
7
Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131
COVID-19 pandemic from the USA, Europe, and China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control
Ser. 28, 32359–32373. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-12938-2.
Diener, E., Napa-Scollon, C.K., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., Suh, E.M., 2000. Positivity and the
construction of life satisfaction judgments: global happiness is not the sum of its
parts. J. Happiness Stud. 1, 159–176.
Feng, Y., Wang, X., Liang, Z., Hu, S., Xie, Y., Wu, G., 2021. Effects of emission trading
system on green total factor productivity in China: empirical evidence from a quasi-
natural experiment. J. Clean. Prod. 294 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2021.126262.
Fu, Q., Abdul Rahman, A.A., Jiang, H., Abbas, J., Comite, U., 2022. Sustainable supply
chain and business performance: the impact of strategy, network design, information
systems, and organizational structure. Sustainability 14, 1080. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su14031080.
Goodwin, D., Holman, I., Pardthaisong, L., Visessri, S., Ekkawatpanit, C., Rey Vicario, D.,
2022. What is the evidence linking financial assistance for drought-affected
agriculture and resilience in tropical Asia? A systematic review. Reg. Environ.
Change 22, 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10113-021-01867-Y.
Hsu, C.C., Quang-Thanh, N., Chien, F.S., Li, L., Mohsin, M., 2021. Evaluating green
innovation and performance of financial development: mediating concerns of
environmental regulation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28, 57386–57397.
https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-14499-W.
Hwang, J., Abbas, J., Joo, K., Choo, S.-W., Hyun, S.S., 2022. The effects of types of
service providers on experience economy, brand attitude, and brand loyalty in the
restaurant industry. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 19, 15. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph19063430.
IEA, 2022. Net zero by 2050 – analysis [WWW Document]. IEA. URL. https://www.iea.
org/reports/net-zero-by-2050. accessed 5.30.22.
Imran, M., Abbas, J., 2020. The role of strategic orientation in export performance of
China automobile industry. In: Handbook of Research on Managerial Practices and
Disruptive Innovation in Asia. IGI Global, Pennsylvania, pp. 249–263.
IPCC, 2022. Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Cambridge University Press, Geneva.
Jiang, C., Ma, X., 2019. The impact of financial development on carbon emissions: a
global perspective. Sustainability 11, 1–22.
Jiang, Y., Wang, H., Liu, Z., 2021. The impact of the free trade zone on green total factor
productivity -evidence from the shanghai pilot free trade zone. Energy Pol. 148
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112000.
Khan, M.K., Babar, S.F., Oryani, B., Dagar, V., Rehman, A., Zakari, A., Khan, M.O., 2022.
Role of financial development, environmental-related technologies, research and
development, energy intensity, natural resource depletion, and temperature in
sustainable environment in Canada. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 29, 622–638.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15421-0.
Khan, S.A.R., Yu, Z., Sharif, A., Golpîra, H., 2020. Determinants of economic growth and
environmental sustainability in South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation:
evidence from panel ARDL. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 27, 45675–45687.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10410-1.
Khan, S.M., Abbas, J., 2022. Mindfulness and happiness and their impact on employee
creative performance: mediating role of creative process engagement. Think. Skills
Creativ., 101027 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101027.
Latif, B., Ong, T., Meero, A., Rahman, A.A., Sustainability, M.A.-, 2022. undefined,2022.
Employee-Perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) and employee pro-
environmental behavior (PEB): the moderating role of CSR skepticism and CSR.
mdpi.com. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031380.
Lee, Chi Chuan, Lee, Chien Chiang, 2022. How does green finance affect green total
factor productivity? Evidence from China. Energy Econ. 107 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105863.
Li, X., Shu, Y., Jin, X., 2022. Environmental regulation, carbon emissions and green total
factor productivity: a case study of China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 24, 2577–2597.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01546-2.
Lindsey, R., Dahlman, L., 2022. Climate change: global temperature [WWW Document].
Climate.Gov. URL. http://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/
climate-change-global-temperature. accessed 8.10.22.
Liu, S., Hou, P., Gao, Y., Tan, Y., 2022. Innovation and green total factor productivity in
China: a linear and nonlinear investigation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 29,
12810–12831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11436-1.
Liu, W., Shao, X., De Sisto, M., Li, W., 2021. A new approach for addressing endogeneity
issues in the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate
financial performance. Finance Res. Lett. 39, 101623.
Liu, S., Shen, X., Jiang, T., Failler, P., 2021. Impacts of the financialization of
manufacturing enterprises on total factor productivity: empirical examination from
Chinas listed companies. Green Finance 3, 59–89. https://doi.org/10.3934/
gf.2021005.
Liu, W., Xu, Y., Fan, D., Li, Y., Shao, X., Zheng, J., 2022. Alleviating corporate
environmental pollution threats toward public health and safety: the role of smart
city and artificial intelligence. Saf. Sci. 143, 105433.
Liu, Z., Xu, J., Wei, Y., Hatab, A.A., Lan, J., 2021. Nexus between green financing,
renewable energy generation, and energy efficiency: empirical insights through DEA
technique. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-
17092-3.
Lu, L., Zheng, H., Chen, M., Najam, H., 2022. Tackling carbon intensity with green
finance in COVID-19: recommendations for OECD economies. Climate Change
Economic. 11, 12–38.
Lu, Lijing, Zheng, H., Chen, M., Najam, H., 2022. Tackling carbon intensity with green
finance in COVID-19: recommendations for OECD economies. Climate Change
Economic. https://doi.org/10.1142/s2010007822400140.
C. Jiakui et al.
Najam, H., Abbas, J., Álvarez-Otero, S., Dogan, E., Sial, M.S., 2022. Towards green
recovery: can banks achieve financial sustainability through income diversification
in ASEAN countries? Econ. Anal. Pol. 76, 522–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
eap.2022.09.004.
Najam, H., Riaz Malik, I., 2021. Nexus between diversification and banking efficiency in
developing economies. J. Bus. Econ. 13, 34–49. https://doi.org/10.5311/
JBE.2021.26.6.
Nawaz, M.A., Seshadri, U., Kumar, P., Aqdas, R., Patwary, A.K., Riaz, M., 2021. Nexus
between green finance and climate change mitigation in N-11 and BRICS countries:
empirical estimation through difference in differences (DID) approach. Environ. Sci.
Pollut. Control Ser. 28, 6504–6519. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-10920-Y.
Olalere, O.E., Islam, M.A., Yusof, W.S., Ariffin, K.H.K., Kamruzzaman, M., 2021. The
moderating role of financial innovation on financial risks, business risk and firm
value nexus: empirical evidence from Nigeria. AIP Conf. Proc. 2339 https://doi.org/
10.1063/5.0045082.
Pan, C., Abbas, J., Álvarez-Otero, S., Khan, H., Cai, C., 2022. Interplay between corporate
social responsibility and organizational green culture and their role in employees
responsible behavior towards the environment and society. J. Clean. Prod., 132878
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132878.
Paramati, S.R., Shahzad, U., Doğan, B., 2022. The role of environmental technology for
energy demand and energy efficiency: evidence from OECD countries. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 153 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111735.
Qu, K., Liu, Z., 2022. Green innovations, supply chain integration and green information
system: a model of moderation. J. Clean. Prod. 339, 130557 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130557.
Riccardi, R., Oggioni, G., Toninelli, R., 2012. Efficiency analysis of world cement
industry in presence of undesirable output: application of data envelopment analysis
and directional distance function. Energy Pol. 44, 140–152. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.030.
Shahbaz, M., Nasir, M.A., Lahiani, A., 2022. Role of financial development in economic
growth in the light of asymmetric effects and financial efficiency. Int. J. Finance
Econ. 27, 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2157.
Shao, J., He, Z., 2022. How does social media drive corporate carbon disclosure?
evidence from China. Front. Ecol. Evol. 10, 971077.
Shao, J., Zhang, T., Wang, H., Tian, Y., 2022. Corporate social responsibility and
consumer emotional marketing in big data era: a mini literature review. Front.
Psychol. 13, 919601.
Sharma, S., Prakash, G., Kumar, A., Mussada, E.K., Antony, J., Luthra, S., 2021.
Analysing the relationship of adaption of green culture, innovation, green
performance for achieving sustainability: mediating role of employee commitment.
J. Clean. Prod. 303, 127039 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127039.
Song, M., Peng, L., Shang, Y., Zhao, X., 2022. Green technology progress and total factor
productivity of resource-based enterprises: a perspective of technical compensation
of environmental regulation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 174. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121276.
Journal of Cleaner Production 382 (2023) 135131
Sun, L., Fang, S., Iqbal, S., Bilal, A.R., 2022. Financial stability role on climate risks, and
climate change mitigation: implications for green economic recovery. Environ. Sci.
Pollut. Control Ser. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17439-w.
UNDP, 2021. Sustainable development goals [WWW Document] UN Develope Program.
URL https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals accessed 8.19.21.
Wang, H., Cui, H., Zhao, Q., 2021. Effect of green technology innovation on green total
factor productivity in China: evidence from spatial durbin model analysis. J. Clean.
Prod. 288 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125624.
Wang, S., Abbas, J., Sial, M.S., Álvarez-Otero, S., Cioca, L.-I., 2022. Achieving green
innovation and sustainable development goals through green knowledge
management: moderating role of organizational green culture. J. Innovate.
Knowledge. 7, 100272 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100272.
Xiao, H., Khan, S.M., Huang, S., Abbas, J., Matei, M.C., Badulescu, D., 2022. Employees
green enterprise motivation and green creative process engagement and their impact
on green creative performance. IJERPH 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph2004010001.
Xie, Z., Liu, X., Najam, H., Fu, Q., Abbas, J., Comite, U., Cismas, L.M., Miculescu, A.,
2022. Achieving financial sustainability through revenue diversification: a green
pathway for financial institutions in asia. Sustainability 14, 1–16. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su14063512.
Yang, S., Liu, W., Zhang, Z., 2022. The dynamic value of China’s high-tech zones: direct
and indirect influence on urban ecological innovation. Land 11 (1), 59.
Yoshino, N., Schloesser, T., Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., 2021. Social funding of green
financing: an application of distributed ledger technologies. Int. J. Finance Econ. 26,
6060–6073. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2108.
Yu, S., Abbas, J., Álvarez-Otero, S., Cherian, J., 2022. Green knowledge management:
scale development and validation. J. Innovate. Knowledge. 7, 100244 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100244.
Zhang, C., Khan, I., Dagar, V., Saeed, A., Zafar, M.W., 2022. Environmental impact of
information and communication technology: unveiling the role of education in
developing countries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 178, 121570. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121570.
Zhao, L., Gu, J., Abbas, J., Kirikkaleli, D., Yue, X.-G., 2022. Does quality management
system help organizations in achieving environmental innovation and sustainability
goals? A structural analysis. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2100436, 0.
Zhao, M., Liu, F., Sun, W., Tao, X., 2020. The relationship between environmental
regulation and green total factor productivity in China: an empirical study based on
the panel data of 177 cities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 17, 1–19. https://doi.
org/10.3390/ijerph17155287.
Zheng, J., He, J., Shao, X., Liu, W., 2022. The employment effects of environmental
regulation: evidence from eleventh five-year plan in China. J. Environ. Manag. 316,
115197.