Green Finance Management and Corporate Sustainable Innovation: Evidence from a Dual-Path Mechanism
Published 2026-02-08
Keywords
- Green finance management,
- Sustainable innovation,
- R&D intensity,
- Risk-taking capacity,
- Panel data
- Corporate sustainability ...More
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2026 Chenlu Yu, Xiaoming Wang, Wencan Zhang, Wei Yet Tan

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This study conceptualizes green finance management as a strategic managerial capability and investigates how it influences corporate sustainable innovation performance. Using a multi-industry panel of Malaysian listed firms from 2019–2024, fixed-effects regression and parallel mediation analysis are employed to examine the effects of green finance management on green innovation output and long-term financial performance, with R&D intensity and risk-taking capacity as mediators. Green finance management significantly enhances both green patents and long-term ROA. Its impact on green innovation operates primarily through two internal mechanisms: increased R&D intensity and expanded risk-taking capacity. When both mediators are included, the direct effect becomes insignificant, indicating a robust parallel mediation structure. Green finance functions through organizational reconfiguration rather than mechanical capital transfer, underscoring its managerial role in shaping sustainable innovation trajectories.
References
- 1.Aghion, P., Dechezleprêtre, A., Hémous, D., Martin, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Carbon taxes, path dependency, and directed technical change: Evidence from the auto industry. Journal of Political Economy, 124(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1086/684581
- 2.Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
- 3.Bolton, P., & Kacperczyk, M. (2021). Do investors care about carbon risk? Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 517–549.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.008
- 4.Boubakri, N., Cosset, J. C., & Saffar, W. (2013). The role of state and foreign owners in corporate risk-taking: Evidence from privatization. Journal of Financial Economics, 108(3), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2012.12.007
- 5.Broadstock, D. C., Chan, K., Cheng, L. T. W., & Wang, X. (2021). The role of ESG performance during times of financial crisis: Evidence from COVID-19 in China. Finance Research Letters, 38, 101716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101716
- 6.Hall, B. H., & Lerner, J. (2010). The financing of R&D and innovation. Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, 1, 609–639.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7218(10)01014-2
- 7.Kahn, M. E., Mohaddes, K., Ng, R. N. C., Pesaran, M. H., Raissi, M., & Yang, J. C. (2021). Long-term macroeconomic effects of climate change: A cross-country analysis. Energy Economics, 104, 105624.
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105624
- 8.Pankratz, N., Bauer, R., & Derwall, J. (2023). Climate change, firm performance, and investor surprises. Management Science, 69(12), 7352–7398. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4604
- 9.Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
- 10.Tripopsakul, S. (2025). ESG practices, green innovation, and financial performance: Panel evidence from ASEAN firms. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 18(8), 467. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm18080467