ARTICLE

https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 OPEN

Digital green value co-creation behavior, digital

green network embedding and digital green
innovation performance: moderating effects of
digital green network fragmentation
Shi Yin 1,2 ✉ & Yudan Zhao1
1234567890():,;

In the era of digital economy, digital green value co-creation behavior (DGVCB) has replaced
the previous value creation. DGVCB has become a tool for business ecosystems to gain
sustainable ecological advantages in today’s increasingly complex market. At present, there
are few researches on the influence of DGVCB and digital green network embedding(DGNE)
on digital green innovation performance(DGIP). This paper faces the institutional logic of
DGVCB, analyzes the mechanism of DGNE and digital green network fragmentation (DGNF)
in the context of business ecosystem competition, and then constructs the causal relationship
between DGVCB and DGIP. Based on 326 valid questionnaires and sample data, this paper
empirically studies the effects of digital green value co-creation and DGNE on DGIP by using
regression analysis method, and verifies and discusses the proposed theoretical hypotheses.
The results show that DGVCB and DGNE have significant positive effects on the improve-
ment of DGIP. DGNE plays an intermediary role between DGVCB and DGIP. DGNF plays a
positive moderating role between DGVCB and DGIP. This study provides theoretical guidance
for the governance of business ecosystem and the formulation of cooperation strategies for
enterprises.

1 College of Economics and Management, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, China. 2 School of Economics and Management, Harbin Engineering

University, Harbin 150001, China. ✉email: shyshi0314@163.com

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 1

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
I
Introduction
n the era of digital economy, digital green value co-creation
behavior (DGVCB) based on demand has gradually replaced
value creation based on production (Ma and Lin, 2023). The
mutual benefit and integration brought by digital green economy
enables the market matching of discrete resources more effec-
tively, and enables the emergence of business models that satisfy
customer value proposition (Luo et al., 2023). Enterprise digital
green behavior is the deep integration of digital advanced tech-
nology and green manufacturing technology, so that data drives
the development of all aspects of the enterprise, and promotes the
transformation of the whole process of research and develop-
ment, manufacturing, marketing, logistics and service, so that the
value of the data element can be fully played, so that the enter-
prise can develop in a healthier and greener direction (Mao et al.,
2019). Especially under the predicament of the new coronavirus
epidemic, enterprises need the support of digital technology to
resume production and work offline (Guo et al., 2020). Energy
consumption and environmental problems are becoming
increasingly prominent (Shrimali et al., 2020), and it is urgent for
enterprises to develop in a more green direction (Sumaira and
Siddique, 2023). Because of this, the world’s major economies are
aiming at this opportunity, competing to develop advanced digital
green manufacturing technology, to digitally transform tradi-
tional enterprises, and combined with the characteristics of their
own enterprises, give play to their advantages, and create unique
and advanced enterprise trump cards for their own countries
(Shahatha Al-Mashhadani et al., 2021). Germany’s Industry
4.0 strategy (Kuo et al., 2019), the United States focuses on
cutting-edge technologies and high-end enterprises to achieve re-
industrialization, Japan and South Korea and other Asian coun-
tries are also actively promoting the digital green upgrade of
enterprises, Japan to the “connected industry” and technological
innovation as its focus, for the construction of intelligent society,
while South Korea is building smart factories to promote enter-
prise transformation and innovation. Actively introduce policies
to support digital transformation (Wagner et al., 2017). In June
2020, the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
released the “2020 edition of the Manufacturing White Paper”,
which specifically formulated the development strategy to accel-
erate the digital green transformation of enterprises (Hatani,
2020). This shows the importance of digital green transformation
of enterprises in international competition (Yin et al., 2023). In
the context of the development of a new generation of digital
technology, promoting the digital transformation of enterprises,
while playing the role of digital technology on the green devel-
opment of enterprises, and promoting green development has
become the development trend of enterprises (Li et al., 2022).
At the same time, platform competition caused by the sharing
economy is increasingly fierce, and the nature of market com-
petition is more obvious. Business ecosystem, as a key tool in the
era of digital green economy, describes the competition and
cooperation mode among innovative digital green enterprises in
the new era with the metaphor of ecological knowledge (Yin and
Yu, 2022). The business ecosystem integrates scientific and
technological innovation, technology research and development,
and commercial application. With the help of digital green
technology, the business ecosystem can realize the information
exchange and communication between the production ecosystem
and the consumption ecosystem, so that the digital green inno-
vative enterprises can enter the market better, respond to the
market more quickly, and obtain sustainable competitive
advantages (Pidun et al., 2019). In this regard, enterprises should
pay more attention to the construction of the external environ-
ment of the business ecosystem, satisfy the value proposition of
customers, and pay attention to the “demand side” digital green
2 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
innovation. In the business ecosystem, the cost of searching and
matching consumers’ personalized needs is greatly reduced, and
the value proposition from the customer is more positively
responded to. The full penetration of the long tail market has
replaced the dominant development of the traditional market
(Payne et al., 2017). In the digital green economy, customer
support means taking control of the consumer ecosystem.
Through communication and exchange with users, information
data can be obtained and consumer data analysis can be input
into the production decision-making system of enterprises, which
can help enterprises choose more reasonable decisions and meet
the value proposition from the demand side more accurately and
efficiently (Kaur et al., 2021). Therefore, the research on the
behavior of DGVCB can effectively reveal the reasons behind the
emergence of business ecosystem, and then help digital green
innovative enterprises to develop schemes to obtain sustainable
ecological advantages (Ma and Lin, 2023).
In the era of industrial economy, the attention of enterprises is
always focused on production capacity. Enterprises only focus on
the production and manufacturing of the “supply side”, and seek
benefits and efficiency through research and innovation of tech-
nology and optimal allocation of resources, so as to achieve value
creation. Therefore, the value creation in the industrial economy
era is generated within the enterprise (Grönroos and Voima,
2013). However, it also leads to the neglect of the value propo-
sition of customers, and the real needs of customers are difficult
to be met. In the context of big data, DGVCB has become the
main form of value creation in the era of digital economy due to
overcapacity and customer value proposition. Different from the
one-way transfer of value under the product-led logic, DGVCB
follows the service-oriented logic and emphasizes more on the
response to the demand side (Ranjan and Read, 2016). However,
due to the complexity of the business ecosystem, the current
competitive landscape cannot be explained solely in terms of the
interaction between firms and consumers. There are two main
reasons: First, the digital economy era has broken the traditional
production and supply system, and the reconstruction of the
value chain has become an important feature of the current
business model. With the support of digital green innovation
technology, the production ecosystem will integrate all kinds of
suppliers organically and transform into a digital green produc-
tion ecosystem (Yin et al., 2022). As the main body of innovation
is more diversified, the new practice of multiple relationship
interaction is needed to make a more accurate explanation of the
basis of obtaining commercial ecological advantages.Second, the
environmental factors affecting the co-creation of digital green
value have changed. Explicit and implicit knowledge flows more
frequently. At the same time, the co-creation of digital green
value amplifies the role of institutional factors, and the value
barrier caused by the fragmentation of digital green network also
gives a distinct label to the business ecosystem (Goetz et al.,
2022). It is found that the degree of digital green network
embedding (DGNE) determines the ecological status of digital
green innovative enterprises in the business ecosystem. Digital
green network fragmentation (DGNF) is also an important factor
affecting the development of DGVCB (Dong et al., 2023).
Although DGVCB emphasizes value co-creation under multi-
relationship interaction, the competition of business ecosystem
has not been weakened. Instead, competition becomes fiercer as
the business ecosystem is iteratively updated and a large number
of enterprises in the business ecosystem enter and exit (Barile
et al., 2021). Unlike bureaucracies and markets in resource allo-
cation, the network organization of business ecosystems still plays
a key role. On the one hand, the degree of DGNE reflects the
position characteristics of enterprises in the business ecosystem.
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
Enterprises with a high degree of DGNE can bring richer and
more extensive resources in the process of digital green value
creation. On the other hand, in the business ecosystem, DGVCB
process has more detailed division of labor and cooperation (Wu
and Liu, 2022). As a situational factor, DGNF will affect the
cooperative behavior of digital green innovative enterprises
(Dong et al., 2023). This paper argues that the differences in
experience sharing degree, knowledge sharing degree and com-
petition among digital green innovative enterprises in the busi-
ness ecosystem form the DGNF. DGNF will certainly affect the
realization of digital green innovation performance (DGIP)
(Valaei et al., 2022). In conclusion, the degree of DGNE may play
an intermediary role between DGVCB and DGIP. DGNF may
play a moderating role in DGVCB (Ardito et al., 2021). Therefore,
based on the current situation of the development of the business
ecosystem, this paper reviews the existing literature, proposes
relevant hypotheses and conducts empirical tests to analyze the
influence mechanism of DGVCB on the realization of DGIP
(Rong et al., 2013). Based on the development of the current
business ecosystem, this paper proposes relevant research
hypotheses through literature discussion, constructs theoretical
models, conducts questionnaire surveys, and takes 326 Chinese
enterprises as samples to empirically test the influence mechan-
ism of enterprises’ DGVCB on DGIP. The possible contribution
of this paper is to enrich the theory of digital green value co-
creation based on the investigation of enterprises’ DGVCB under
the business ecosystem. Based on the DGNE theory, it provides a
relatively complete theoretical analysis framework for enterprises
to enhance DGIP through DGVCB, and then provides ideas for
the governance of the business ecosystem, and verifies the impact
mechanism of enterprises’ DGVCB on DGIP from an empirical
perspective. In order to find out the strategic path to improve the
performance of digital green innovation in the business ecosys-
tem, and then improve the universality of digital green value co-
creation theory. At the same time, this paper takes the frag-
mentation of digital green network as a situational factor to
explore its effect on the co-creation of digital green value, pro-
viding a new perspective for the study of deep collaboration
among enterprises. The research of this paper has important
guiding value for the cultivation of competitive advantage and the
formulation of ecological strategy in the business ecosystem.
The remaining contents of this paper are as follows. “Theore-
tical basis and research hypothesis” reviews the relevant literature
and proposes the research hypothesis. “Research design”
describes the research design and ideas. “Data analysis and
hypothesis testing” analyzes the regression data and tests the
research hypothesis. “Conclusions and implications” summarizes
and analyzes the empirical research results.
Theoretical basis and research hypothesis
Theoretical basis
Research on DGVCB. With the opening of government policies,
the change of industry rules, the gradual improvement of market
economic system and the increase of market development
potential, the closed production and management mode gradually
disappeared. Business subjects from the original separate business
to cooperation development (Kala and Chaubey, 2023). The
correlation of resource factors has been enhanced. The business
world has changed dramatically, and this environment makes
DGVCB possible (Ma et al., 2019). Different from value creation
based on production end, DGVCB drives production ecosystem
operation by demand end. The flow mode of DGVCB is very
different from that of traditional innovation cooperation network
and changes with the development of value creation theory
(Adner, 2017). When an enterprise has unique resources or high
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
ARTICLE
resource combination capability that other enterprises do not
have, it means that the enterprise has core competitive advantages
in the market. Enterprises can obtain value premium by virtue of
their core competitive advantages (Qiu et al., 2020). At present,
the research on enterprise market competitive advantage still
stays in the traditional industrial economic background. The
ultimate goal of enterprise value creation is to meet the real needs
of customers. The relevant value creation theory system focusing
on the supply side cannot effectively explain the phenomenon of
the increasingly complex business model (Freudenreich et al.,
2020). Most traditional enterprises ascribe the root cause of
business failure to the failure of timely acquisition of the real
needs of customers. In the era of digital green economy, the
advantages of big data should be used to give full play to the role
of digital green industry and digital green industry in the real
industry. We should establish a mechanism that can quickly
respond to the market and meet the real demand of the demand
side, so as to achieve the long-term development goal of the
enterprise (Liu et al., 2022). As the research on the supply side
gradually shifts to the research on the demand side, it has become
the focus of digital green innovation management to deeply
understand the value proposition of customers and let customers
participate in the production process (Piller et al., 2010). Under
the influence of DGVCB and digital green technology, the tra-
ditional value creation theory has undergone earth-shaking
changes (Balzer et al., 2020). Under the environment of digital
green economy, the value proposition from customers is realized
with the formation of digital business ecosystem. The value pre-
mium that shared advantage brings to the Long Tail market has
surpassed that of mainstream products (Salvador et al., 2020). It
has become the development trend of today’s market to focus on
the value proposition of customers at the demand side, to change
from passively meeting customer needs to actively developing,
and to establish the consumption ecosystem. At the same time, it
has become a new strategic trend for enterprises to establish
production ecosystem to satisfy customer value proposition and
realize organic match with market (Morgan-Thomas et al., 2020).
Based on the above analysis, DGVCB needs to participate in
market competition with the shared advantages of the ecosystem,
obtain competitive advantages through sharing advantages, and
obtain profits through DGVCB (Kang and Na, 2020). Based on
this, the DGVCB needs to be studied in the context of the new
economic era, so as to provide new theoretical support for the
enterprise transformation in the digital economy era.
At present, DGVCB has changed from dual interaction to
multiple interaction. Based on the background of big data era and
the help of digital business ecosystem, the problem of information
asymmetry has been effectively solved. Customer personalized
needs have gained more attention, enriched the value elements,
and made the value interaction more frequent and the value
relationship more diversified (Heikka et al., 2018). The interac-
tion, division of labor and cooperation between the demand side
and the supply side of the business ecosystem become closer, so
that the business ecosystem can quickly respond to the customer
demand on the demand side. The business ecology realizes the
reconstruction with the help of big data platform. DGVCB based
on commercial ecosystem has become a new trend of market
competition (Pidun et al., 2020). Different from the traditional
value co-creation behavior of the binary relationship interaction
between enterprises and customers, the relationship interaction of
DGVCB in the business ecosystem is more diversified, involving
more elements, and the process is more complex (Chekfoung
et al., 2020). In the process of digital green value creation, the
existing enterprises in the business ecosystem constantly
exchange information, knowledge and resources, and jointly
develop production and operation plans and implementation
3
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
plans to meet customer needs and gain profits (Rong et al., 2021).
At the same time, the continuous upgrading of the business
ecosystem brings severe challenges to the enterprises in the
ecosystem. It requires enterprises to constantly analyze the
internal and external environment, adjust resources and cap-
abilities, and act together with other incumbent enterprises to
meet the value proposition of customers (Sashi, 2021). In the era
of digital economy, the research of DGVCB becomes more and
more important. DGVCB among enterprises is a powerful tool to
break cooperation barriers and effectively use external resources.
The research on DGVCB has changed from product-led logic to
service-led logic. Value creation from the traditional closed to
now open, and gradually towards the business ecosystem
(Herskovits et al., 2013). However, most of the existing researches
discuss the influence mechanism of DGVCB on enterprise
performance through qualitative research methods. How to carry
out enterprise digital green transformation in the business
ecosystem, how to effectively create digital green value and
improve enterprise digital green innovation level, occupy a higher
ecological niche, we need to conduct more in-depth research
(Shen et al., 2022).
Research hypothesis
DGVCB and DGIP. Through a comparative analysis of the
cooperation mode in the digital economy era and the traditional
division of labor cooperation in the business ecosystem, some
scholars proposed that the DGVCB in the business ecosystem
should focus on the value proposition of customers, and based on
this, they established the DART model. The DART model
includes four dimensions—dialogue, access, risk mitigation, and
transparency (Anshu et al., 2022). Dialogue refers to peer-to-peer
communication in the business ecosystem. The purpose of the
dialogue is to discuss common problems and develop solutions to
them. Acquisition refers to the acquisition of resources and
capabilities necessary to meet customer demands and ensure that
the process of digital green innovation is more demand-driven.
Risk reduction reflects the risk sharing mechanism of DGVCB in
the business ecosystem. Enterprises must reduce the risk, in order
to obtain long-term survival and development of enterprises.
Transparency emphasizes information completeness and sym-
metry. There are a lot of transactions in DGVCB of enterprises.
By improving the information symmetry and transparency of
innovation cooperation between enterprises, the transaction costs
of enterprises can be reduced (Chandna and Salimath, 2022).
As the current economic environment changes rapidly, the
digital green innovation of the business ecosystem relies more on
the combination with external entities to achieve the purpose of
value reconstruction (Sarfraz et al., 2023). From the perspective of
process dimension, the iterative renewal of business ecosystem
cannot be separated from the organic connection of technology
innovation community, industry development community and
business application community (Yin et al., 2022). In addition,
the business ecosystem can quickly respond to the demand and
supply of digital green innovation, and can timely input and rapid
output of digital green innovation (Zahra et al., 2023). The
process of enterprises co-creating digital green value is also the
process of enterprises gaining ecological advantages in the
business ecological network. In DGVCB, dialogue can help
enterprises understand customers’ personalized needs, ensure the
right direction of work, improve the efficiency of resource
docking, and enhance the performance of digital green innova-
tion (Bleier et al., 2018). As an advanced form of cooperation,
business ecosystem has the unique market competitive advantage
of reducing risks. The business ecosystem can respond quickly to
changes in the market environment and adjust DGVCB actions in
4 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
a timely manner to reduce cooperation risks. DGVCB can
provide risk buffer for enterprises in the process of meeting
customer needs, and thus improve the performance of enter-
prises’ digital green innovation (Ritala et al., 2013). In the
business ecosystem, higher transparency of cooperation is
conducive to protecting the cooperation between enterprises,
improving the efficiency of ecosystem management, reducing
opportunistic behavior and improving the performance of
enterprises’ digital green innovation (Gardner et al., 2019). Based
on this, this paper proposes the following hypothesis:
H1: DGVCB has a significant positive impact on
enterprises’ DGIP.
DGNE and DGIP. Thanks to digital green technology, business
network relationships are more diversified, network scale is lar-
ger, interaction frequency is higher, and network structure is
more complex (Ritter and Pedersen, 2020). The competitive
advantage of business ecosystem is reflected in DGNE. Digital
green innovative enterprises in the network can use digital green
technology to quickly determine their own embedment position
in the network to give play to the advantages of cooperation.
DGNE includes two dimensions, namely structural embedding
and relational embedding (Lyu et al., 2017). The more structurally
embedded a business is in the network, the greater its impact. In
addition, digital green innovation enterprises with a strong degree
of structural embedment are easier to cooperate with other
enterprises, can respond quickly to market demand, and are
easier to improve DGIP (Wang et al., 2016). The higher the
degree of relationship embeddedness in the system, the more
frequent the interaction between the enterprise and other enter-
prises in the network. Enterprises with a high degree of relational
embeddedness are more likely to establish cooperative relation-
ships, and other enterprises in the network have higher trust and
dependence on them. Having high-quality partnerships means
that the more innovative the enterprise is. It can be seen that
enterprises with a high degree of relational embeddedness can
effectively improve their DGIP (Han, 2022).
In addition, the lack of network embedding will affect the
efficiency of cooperation and make it impossible for cooperation
to achieve the best results. Especially when opportunistic behavior
appears, cooperation can not be carried out. However, when the
degree of network embedding is too high, it will lead to structure
and relationship rigidity, inertia thinking and other problems (Shi
et al., 2020). However, in the era of digital economy, network
embedding gradually transforms to DGNE. With the help of
information sharing mechanism under big data, DGNE can offset
the negative impact caused by excessive or insufficient embedding
degree. These negative effects will be eliminated with the help of
digital green technology. Therefore, in the context of digital
economy, DGNE has a positive impact on enterprises’ DGIP (Pan
et al., 2019). To this end, this paper proposes the following
hypothesis:
H2: DGNE plays a significant positive role in
enterprises’ DGIP.
DGVCB, DGNE, and DGIP. DGVCB by enterprises can not only
improve the performance of digital green innovation, but also
help enterprises occupy the core position in the network and
obtain relevant power advantages and sustainable competitive
advantages (Aquilani et al., 2020). Digital green innovation
enterprises occupying higher ecological niche have more oppor-
tunities to exchange technical knowledge and cooperate with
other enterprises, which is more conducive to the improvement of
their DGIP. Dialogue makes DGNE possible. Through frequent
information exchange and communication with other enterprises
in the ecosystem and joint product development and design with
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
cooperative enterprises, they can respond positively to the value
proposition of customers, expand the scale of production and
operation, enhance the discourse power of enterprises in the
ecosystem, improve the ecological niche of enterprises, further
master the digital green core technology, and finally improve the
degree of structural embedment. At the same time, a good dia-
logue mechanism can establish a close relationship with partners,
increase the frequency of cooperation and mutual trust, and help
each other to solve problems together, thus improving the degree
of relationship embedding (Freudenreich et al., 2020). Not only
that, but the business ecosystem can enhance relational
embeddedness by increasing transparency. The more transparent
the ecosystem is, the easier it will be to establish cooperative
relationships with enterprises in other niches, grasp relevant
information about enterprises in other niches, and understand the
needs of partners. An ecosystem with high transparency can
effectively solve problems such as information asymmetry. The
more transparent the enterprise is, the higher the niche it occu-
pies, the more relevant rights and influence it has, which can
make it play the role of intermediary bridge in the business
ecosystem. In addition, with the establishment of the product
service information platform, risk assessment and risk avoidance
mechanism of the business ecosystem, the degree of DGNE is
further enhanced (Pomegbe et al., 2020).
The entry and outflow of a large number of enterprises with the
iterative updating of the business ecosystem reflects the degree of
DGNE. Dialogue mechanism can help enterprises establish good
relations with other enterprises and promote cooperation, and help
enterprises occupy a more central position in the business
ecosystem (Li et al., 2022). The friction in the process of DGVCB
is further reduced along with the formation of risk sharing
mechanism. The elements of the business ecosystem are further
integrated under the role of frequent information exchange, so that
they can quickly respond to the needs of niche markets, so as to
improve the performance of enterprises’ digital green innovation6.
Based on the above analysis, DGNE plays an intermediary role
between DGVCB and DGIP. Only by embedding in the network
and occupying the core position, can digital green innovation
enterprises master more key information and technology, obtain a
greater voice, satisfy a larger long-tail market, and improve their
DGIP (Li et al., 2022). DGVCB is an active factor in DGNE.
DGVCB can enhance the degree of relational embedment of
enterprises and establish intimate connection and cooperative
relationship. DGVCB can also help enterprises respond quickly to
market changes and gain ecological advantages, thus improving
their DGIP (Tajvidi et al., 2021). Based on this, this paper proposes
the following hypothesis:
H3: DGVCB has a significant positive impact on DGNE.
H4: DGNE plays an intermediary role between DGVCB
and DGIP.
Regulatory role of DGNF. In the business ecosystem, DGNF refers
to the internal fault tendency caused by different enterprise
attributes, different division of labor and different degree of
technical knowledge sharing in the process of cooperation. In the
era of digital green economy, enterprises must take into account
the influence of DGNF on DGVCB in innovation cooperation
(Feng et al., 2022). Under the action of DGNF, enterprises can
effectively utilize external technology innovation resources,
establish good trust relationship and cooperation mechanism
with partners, further strengthen the positive effect of DGVCB on
DGNE, and realize the performance of enterprise digital green
innovation (Lan et al., 2017). DGNF includes digital green rela-
tionship fragmentation and digital green status fragmentation
(Sarfraz et al., 2023). Digital green relation classification frag-
mentation is a potential network stratification fragmentation
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
ARTICLE
caused by the uneven distribution of relationship strength among
technology subjects in the network. The stronger the degree of
relationship dispersion in the network, the higher the strength of
the network relationship fragmentation. In a network with a
strong degree of relationship fragmentation, multiple subgroups
will appear. These subgroups trust each other, share professional
technical knowledge and innovation resources, and share risks
(Charterina et al., 2018). Within the sub-group, it is easier for
enterprises to carry out DGVCB actions, and the degree of DGNE
is further strengthened. Because of the subgroup formed by the
strength of relationship fragmentation, enterprises trust each
other and the quality of cooperation between enterprises is
higher. Therefore, in enterprises with strong relationship frag-
mentation, the influence of DGVCB on DGNE is more significant
(Yang et al., 2018). Digital green status fragmentation is a net-
work fragmentation caused by different similarity degree of
technology subject’s embedding position in the network. In a
network with strong network fragmentation, multiple subgroup
structures with similar locations will appear, and trust relation-
ships will be easier to be established among these subgroup
structures to realize information exchange and high-quality
cooperation. Therefore, the stronger the degree of local disloca-
tion, the more significant the influence of DGVCB on the degree
of DGNE. It can be seen that the fragmentation of digital green
network is conducive to forming a good cooperative relationship
within subgroups, strengthening internal connections, improving
the degree of DGNE, and then making the business ecosystem
occupy a key position in the network through DGVCB.
In addition, DGNF will affect the process of DGVCB affecting
DGIP. In a network with strong DGNF, innovation entities trust
each other, frequently exchange professional and technical
knowledge, and carry out high-quality communication and
cooperation, which is conducive to the transfer and absorption
of key professional knowledge and innovation resources, improve
the utilization rate of innovation resources, and thus achieve the
performance of digital green innovation. The fragmentation of
the digital green network will cause the enterprises in the network
to have a “sense of crisis”, stimulate the enterprises to carry out
technological innovation activities, cultivate innovation ability,
and improve their own DGIP. In addition, the fragmentation of
digital green network will reduce the cost of searching and
transferring innovative resources of enterprises, improve the level
of professional and technical knowledge of enterprises, and
rapidly respond to market demands and realize the value
proposition of customers through the information exchange
and reference between enterprises within the subgroup. It can be
seen that DGNF will strengthen the DGNE process, and then
affect the realization of enterprises’ DGIP. To sum up, this paper
proposes the following hypothesis:
H5: DGNF plays a positive moderating role between DGVCB
and DGNE.
H6: DGNF plays a positive moderating role between DGVCB
and DGIP.
To sum up, the theoretical model constructed in this paper is
shown in Fig. 1.
Research design
Measurement of variables. In terms of scale design, this paper
refers to the existing mature scale, and adopts the Likert 7-level
scale for the four variables of DGVCB, DGIP, DGNE and DGNF to
better identify them. 1 means very inconsistent, 7 means very
consistent, and 4 means fair. The item setting for DGVCB draws on
the DART concept and measures dialogue, access, risk mitigation,
and transparency (Fan and Luo, 2020). In this paper, DGNE is
divided into relational embedding and structural embedding to
5
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
H1
H4
Digital green value co-creation H3 Digital green network
behavior embedding
Fig. 1 Theoretical model.
Table 1 Questionnaire.
Question
The number of years your company has been in operation is
The company scale of your enterprise is
The nature of your company
There are many other enterprises connected with your company
The company shares similar values with other partners in digital green
innovation
Your company has a high frequency of interaction with other businesses
Your company has a long relationship with other companies
The output value of your digital green innovation products accounts for a
large proportion of total sales
The digital green innovative products developed by your company have
high customer satisfaction
Your company has more advanced production equipment or process flow
The digital green innovative products developed by your company have a
high market share
Your company has a good communication mechanism to explore and
develop digital green innovation solutions
Your company can share digital green R&D risks with partners
Your company often reduces transaction costs by increasing transparency
in innovation collaborations
Your company has the capability of digital green innovation for demand
transmission
Your company often shares information and resources with companies of a
similar technical level
Your company often gives preference to companies with similar levels of
knowledge about digital green innovation technologies
Your organization often acquires digital green technology knowledge from
companies with similar skill levels
Your company is more inclined to cooperate with companies that have
established good cooperative relations
measure (Moran, 2005). The DGNF is measured from two
dimensions: relational fragmentation and status fragmentation
(Sarfraz et al., 2023). DGIP was measured from four dimensions:
the proportion of output value of new products in total sales,
customer satisfaction, technology content in products and market
share of developed new products (Calik and Bardudeen, 2016). In
addition, enterprises in the initial stage tend to rely on DGVCB to
obtain resources. Enterprises that have entered the mature stage
have more initiative in DGVCB, and it is easier to establish
6 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
H2 Digital green innovation
performance
H5 H6
Digital green network
fragmentation
Option
A. Less than 3 years; B. 3–5 years; C. 5–10 years; D. More than 10 years
A. Less than 50 people; B. 51–100 people; C. 101–500 people; D.
501–2000 people; E. More than 2000 people
A. state-owned business; B. collective enterprises; C. private enterprise; D.
overseas-funded enterprise
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
A. Strongly disagree; B. Less consistent; C. A bit inconsistent; D. General;
E. A bit consistent; F. More in line with; G. Totally agree
cooperative relations with other enterprises, so that other enter-
prises are willing to co-create value with them. The nature and scale
of an enterprise affect its mode of operation and cooperation, and
there is also a big gap in its way of obtaining resources and
information channels. It can be seen that the influence of enterprise
age, enterprise nature and enterprise scale on DGNE, DGIP and
DGVCB should also be taken into account. Therefore, this paper
takes enterprise age, enterprise nature and enterprise scale as con-
trol variables. Details of the questionnaire are shown in Table 1.
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 ARTICLE

Table 2 Sample characteristics.

Statistical Content Frequency Percentage Statistical content Frequency Percentage

Enterprise Age Less than 3 years 99 30.4% Enterprise Scale Less than 50 people 167 51.2%
3–5 years 116 35.6% 51 to 100 people 77 23.6%
5–10 years 40 12.3% 101 to 500 people 35 10.7%
More than 10 years 71 21.8% 501 to 2000 people 19 5.8%
Enterprise Nature State-owned enterprise 131 40.2% More than 2000 people 28 8.6%
Collective enterprises 155 47.5%
Private enterprise 16 4.9%
Foreign-owned enterprise 24 7.4%

Table 3 Reliability and validity analysis.

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Variables Average value Standard deviation Cronbach’s α CR AVE AVE
DGVCB 5.919 0.995 0.982 0.980 0.923 0.961
DGNE 4.202 1.455 0.934 0.946 0.814 0.902
DGNF 5.989 1.016 0.992 0.992 0.970 0.985
DGIP 4.072 1.858 0.973 0.973 0.900 0.949

Data collection and sample characteristics. In this paper,
questionnaires were sent out for investigation. The survey was
conducted from September 2022 to February 2023. SPSS was used
to analyze the recovered questionnaires, and structural equation
models were established to test the research hypotheses. First of
all, a simulation survey was carried out on the preliminary
questionnaire design. 15 executives were randomly interviewed
and the questionnaire was tested. According to the interview
results, the practical significance of the research and the possi-
bility of practical operation are verified. After that, questionnaires
were distributed on a small scale. According to the survey results
and feedback suggestions, questionnaire structure design and
item language description were adjusted to form a formal ques-
tionnaire. The questionnaire survey mainly adopts two methods.
One is to send questionnaires to MBA students with big data
industry background, answer questions and fill in the ques-
tionnaires. Second, through the local government enterprise
information database, randomly selected enterprise samples from
the big data and digital green information technology industry
related industries, and issued one-to-one questionnaires. In
addition, a threshold was set for the test subjects, who were
required to have horizontal cooperation behaviors (such as
research and development, design, production and manufactur-
ing, sales and service, etc.) or vertical cooperation behaviors
(including downstream cooperation situations), and who were
senior managers with the above experience, so as to ensure the
effectiveness of the questionnaire. A total of 500 questionnaires
were distributed in this survey. Based on follow-up feedback, 415
questionnaires were recovered with a recovery rate of 83%. After
validity screening of the collected questionnaires, 326 valid
questionnaires were obtained, which were used as the source of
data analysis in this paper. Basic characteristics of sample
enterprises are shown in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 2, the
surveyed enterprises are mostly mature enterprises, state-owned
enterprises and large enterprises. Therefore, the sample dis-
tribution is representative.
Deviation test. Because each questionnaire filling process is
completed by the same person, there may be homologous bias
problem. In this paper, two methods are used to avoid the
advance. First, before the investigation and research, explain the
academic nature of the research, the application of the research
results and the possible value of the research, so as to eliminate
the doubts of the subjects, so that they can answer the ques-
tionnaire objectively and accurately. Second, in order to prevent
inefficient questionnaire filling, items in the questionnaire should
be designed as specific and accurate as possible to ensure the
accuracy of the questionnaire filling process. This paper also
adopts post-test method, adopts Harman single factor analysis
method to test, and runs the exploratory factor analysis program
provided by SPSS software. The results show that the loading of
the unrotated first principal component is only 23.41% < 40%,
and there is no single factor that can explain most of the variable
factors, indicating that the homologous method deviation does
not cause significant influence. In terms of the non-responder
bias, the first 1/3 and the last 1/3 samples were selected to con-
duct the T-test according to the order of the questionnaire return.
The results showed that there was no significant difference in
more than 93% observed variables, indicating that the non-
responder bias would not cause a significant impact.
Reliability and validity test. In order to ensure the matching
degree between the data collected by the questionnaire and the
theoretical constructs, the reliability and validity of the sample
data were verified. The results are shown in Table 3.
As shown in Table 3, Cronbach’s α coefficient of DGVCB,
DGNE, DGNF and DGIP shows that all scales have good internal
consistency. By calculating the combination reliability CR and
average extraction variance AVE values of each variable, the
results show that CR values of all variables are greater than 0.7,
AVE is greater than 0.5, indicating that the measured variables
have good convergence validity.
AMOS was used to perform confirmatory factor analysis on the
benchmark model and other competing models. The results are
shown in Table 4.
It can be seen from Table 4 that the benchmark model includes
four variables: DGVCB, DGNE, DGNF and DGIP. The structure
shows that the fitting effect of the benchmark model is good
(2 = 282.667, df = 95, χ2/df = 2.975, RMSEA = 0.078,
TLI = 0.975, CFI = 0.981, GFI = 0.902).
Data analysis and hypothesis testing
Descriptive statistics. The mean, standard deviation of the four
variables and the correlation among the variables are shown in
Table 5.

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 7

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5

Table 4 Confirmatory factor analysis results.

Model χ2 df χ2/df RMSEA TLI CFI GFI

Benchmark model 282.667 95 2.975 0.078 0.975 0.981 0.902
Single factor model 4541.613 104 43.669 0.362 0.468 0.539 0.311
Two-factor model 3082.496 103 29.927 0.298 0.640 0.691 0.447
Three-factor model 1610.610 101 15.947 0.214 0.814 0.843 0.578
Three-factor model 2123.782 101 21.028 0.248 0.750 0.790 0.527

Table 5 Mean, standard deviation and correlation coefficient of variables.

Variables Average value Standard deviation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Enterprise age 2.255 1.112 1
Enterprise scale 1.969 1.277 0.211** 1
Enterprise nature 1.794 0.840 0.017 −0.037 1
DGVCB 5.919 0.995 0.020 0.139* 0.033 1
DGNE 4.202 1.455 0.031 0.346** 0.049 0.372** 1
DGNF 5.989 1.016 −0.062 0.147** 0.080 0.749** 0.438** 1
DGIP 4.072 1.858 −0.009 0.282** 0.138* 0.551** 0.711** .592** 1

** and * denote significance levels of 5% and 10%, respectively.

e5 e6 e7 e8

.70 .80 .83 .80

Network Network Network Network

embedding 1 embedding 2 embedding 3 embedding 4

.90 .91 .89

.84

Digital green network .15

e13
embedding

.91 .61 Innovation .90

Value co- e9
e4 .38 performance 1
creation 1
.96
.95
.94 Innovation .89
e3 Value co- e10
.97 .94 performance 2
creation 2
Digital green value co- .33 Digital green innovation
.97 creation performance .95
.94 Value co- Innovation .90
e2 e11
creation 3 performance 3
.97 .96
.64

.94 Innovation .92

e1 Value co-
performance 4 e12
creation 4 e14

Fig. 2 Results of structural equation model testing.

It can be seen from Table 5 that there is a significantly positive
correlation between DGVCB and DGIP, with a correlation
coefficient of 0.551. There is a significant positive correlation
between DGVCB and DGNE, with a correlation coefficient of
0.372. The correlation coefficients between the remaining
variables are shown in Table 5. The results show that there is
no multicollinearity among the explanatory variables, which can
be used for the next step of regression analysis.
Main effect and intermediate effect test. This study uses struc-
tural equation modeling to test the main effect and mediating
effect, and the results are shown in Fig. 2.
The fitting indexes of the structural equation model are as
follows: χ2 = 131.946, df = 48, χ2/df = 2.749, RMSEA = 0.073,
TLI = 0.980, CFI = 0.985, GFI = 0.936, AGFI = 0.896,
NFI = 0.977, IFI = 0.985, RFI = 0.969. These indicators indicate
that the fit of the structural equation model is generally good.
It can be seen from Table 6 that DGVCB can significantly
positively affect DGIP (p < 0.01), so Hypothesis 1 is verified.
DGNE can significantly positively affect DGIP (p < 0.05), so
Hypothesis 2 is verified. DGVCB can significantly positively affect
DGNE (p < 0.01), so Hypothesis 3 is verified. DGVCB can further
affect DGIP through DGNE (p < 0.01), that is, DGNE plays a
partial intermediary role between DGVCB and DGIP, and
Hypothesis 4 is verified.

8 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 ARTICLE

Table 6 Test results of the impact model of “DGVCB - DGNE - DGIP”.

Path Effect Boot S.E. Z P Bias-Corrected 95% Percentile 95% CI

CI
Lower Upper Lower Upper
DGVCB → DGIP 0.614 0.086 7.140 0.009 0.443 0.804 0.442 0.804
DGNE → DGIP 0.847 0.065 13.031 0.018 0.710 0.976 0.730 0.999
DGVCB → DGNE 0.526 0.075 7.013 0.004 0.406 0.709 0.382 0.693
DGVCB → DGNE → DGIP 0.445 0.063 7.063 0.009 0.308 0.587 0.306 0.585

It can be seen from Table 8 that after controlling variables such

Table 7 Moderating effect of DGNF on DGVCB and DGNE. as enterprise age, enterprise nature and enterprise scale, the
regression coefficient of the interaction term between DGNF and
Variables Effect Boot S.E. T P LLCI ULCI DGVCB on DGIP is significant (β = 0.800, p < 0.001), and the
Constant 3.263 0.231 14.147 0.000 2.810 3.717 confidence interval of 0.001 significance level is [0.638, 0.962].
Enterprise −0.003 0.063 −0.049 0.961 −0.126 0.120 The confidence interval does not contain 0, indicating that the
age DGNF has a significant moderating effect on the relationship
Enterprise 0.307 0.055 5.583 0.000 0.199 0.416 between DGVCB and DGIP, so Hypothesis 6 is tested.
scale
Enterprise 0.045 0.081 0.555 0.579 −0.114 0.204
nature Comparative analysis. At present, scholars’ researches on the
DGVCB 0.071 0.103 0.691 0.490 −0.132 0.275 factors affecting the performance of digital green innovation
DGNF 0.647 0.109 5.922 0.000 0.432 0.862 mainly start from the macro level such as environmental reg-
DGVCB × 0.345 0.080 4.321 0.000 0.188 0.503 ulation, national policies and government subsidies (Yang and
DGNF Zhu, 2022). Even the research on enterprise DGIP is mostly
conducted from the perspective of enterprise scale, external
public opinion and external investment (Xu et al., 2021). How-
Table 8 Moderating effect of DGNF on DGVCB and DGIP. ever, there are relatively few studies on the relationship between
DGVCB, DGNE, DGNF and DGIP. From the perspective of
enterprises, this paper studies the impact of digital green value co-
Variables Effect Boot S.E. T P LLCI ULCI
creation and DGNE on DGIP, and discusses its impact
Constant 2.660 0.237 11.202 0.000 2.193 3.127 mechanism on DGIP, so as to expand the internal path for
Enterprise −0.032 0.064 −0.501 0.617 −0.159 0.095 enterprises to promote DGIP, and provide certain supplement for
age
the research on DGVCB and DGIP development.
Enterprise 0.246 0.057 4.344 0.000 0.135 0.358
scale
Compare with reference (Chang, 2019), this paper verifies that
Enterprise 0.222 0.083 2.669 0.008 0.058 0.385 digital green value co-creation has a significant positive impact on
Nature the innovation performance of digital green enterprises. Digital
DGVCB 0.338 0.107 3.172 0.002 0.128 0.547 green value co-creation with the help of digital technology,
DGNF 1.077 0.112 9.580 0.000 0.856 1.299 establish cross-organizational border dialogue mechanisms and
DGVCB × 0.800 0.082 9.722 0.000 0.638 0.962 resource access channels, implement joint risk air defense, achieve
DGNF information symmetry, and give play to the efficiency advantages
of resource matching. Further enhance the performance of digital
green innovation. The research results reflect the cooperative
Test of adjustment effect. In order to eliminate the effect of behavior pattern of digital green innovative enterprises under the
collinearity, after standardized processing of independent and current business ecological environment, enrich the theory of
moderating variables, the moderating effect was tested by enterprise innovation management, and provide theoretical
implementing the program PROCESS3.2 through SPSS. The guidance for digital green innovative enterprises to establish
interaction term of DGNF and DGVCB is introduced to test the strategic cooperative relations.
moderating effect of DGNF on the relationship between DGVCB Previous studies have found that insufficient or excessive degree
and DGNE. of network embeddedness will affect the efficiency of cooperation
It can be seen from Table 7 that after controlling variables such and make it impossible for cooperation to achieve the best results,
as enterprise age, enterprise nature and enterprise scale, the especially when opportunistic behaviors occur (Zhang, 2021). Or
regression coefficient of the interaction term between DGNF and when the degree of network embedding is too high, it will lead to
DGVCB on network embedding is significant (β = 0.345, the structure and relationship rigidity, inertia thinking and other
p < 0.001), and the confidence interval at the significance level problems. However, through the study of this paper, it is found that
of 0.001 is [0.188, 0.503]. The confidence interval does not in the era of digital economy, network embeddings are gradually
contain 0, indicating that the DGNF has a significant moderating transforming to DGNE. With the help of information sharing
effect on DGVCB and DGNE, so Hypothesis 5 is verified. mechanism under big data, DGNE can offset the negative effects
In order to eliminate the effect of collinearity, after standar- caused by excessive or insufficient embeddings, which will be
dized processing of independent and moderating variables, the eliminated with the help of digital green technology. In the context
moderating effect was tested by implementing the program of digital economy, DGNE positively affects the performance of
PROCESS3.2 through SPSS. The interaction term of DGNF and digital green innovation. This research conclusion makes a certain
DGVCB is introduced to test the moderating effect of DGNF on supplement to the research on the development of DGIP, enriche
the relationship between DGVCB and DGIP. The test results are the academic research results on DGIP, and has important
shown in Table 8. theoretical significance.

HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5 9

ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
Conclusions and implications
Conclusions. From the perspective of DGVCB theory and DGNE
theory, this paper empirically tests the relationship between
DGVCB and DGIP.
This paper confirms that DGNE plays an intermediary role
between DGVCB and DGIP. DGNE has a positive impact on
DGIP. With the help of DGVCB, enterprises can be well integrated
into the business ecosystem. Enterprises can obtain a higher
ecological niche in the business ecosystem through DGVCB.
Enterprises with a high degree of DGNE occupy a high ecological
position in the business ecosystem, and these enterprises have a
wider radiation range, which is conducive to expanding the niche
market of digital green innovation enterprises and improving the
performance of digital green innovation. Different from the
traditional network embedding theory, the “side effects” of
excessive embeddedness are weakened by network expansion.
The openness of the business ecosystem eliminates the negative
effects of excessive embeddedness. Thus, in the era of digital green
economy, DGNE has a significantly positive impact on DGIP.
DGNF plays a positive moderating role between DGVCB and
DGIP, and also plays a positive moderating role between DGVCB
and DGNE. The DGNF makes the business ecosystem form
multiple subgroups. Within these subgroups, enterprises trust
each other and are more likely to carry out high-quality
cooperation, realize information exchange, strengthen internal
connections, and improve the degree of DGNE. In addition, in
the business ecosystem with strong fragmentation of digital green
network, it is easy for enterprises to have a sense of crisis, which
encourages digital green enterprises to carry out innovation
activities and enhance their digital green innovation capabilities.
Therefore, DGNF plays a positive moderating role in the
relationship between DGVCB and DGNE, as well as the
relationship between DGVCB and DGIP.
Management enlightenment. The results of this paper provide
important management implications for enterprises to carry out
digital green innovation activities and establish digital green
business ecosystems.
Firstly, enterprises should optimize the business ecosystem and
implement the DGVCB strategy. Enterprises can improve the
DGIP with DGVCB by improving the degree of DGNE in the
business ecosystem. Enterprises can improve their DGIP by
obtaining a high ecological status in the business ecosystem.
Through the implementation of the open strategy, the structure of
the business ecosystem is optimized. By opening up key
technologies for digital green innovation, we should expand the
scope of cooperation, increase the frequency of exchanges and
communication, and achieve information symmetry. With the
help of open rule interfaces, transparent institutional rules should
be established to ensure the fairness of digital green innovation
enterprises in the business ecosystem in the market competition.
Secondly, enterprises should build a business ecosystem
oriented to customer value propositions. The globalization of
competition and the vigorous development of emerging technol-
ogies have compressed the space for traditional value creation.
Digital green innovation enterprises need to establish a business
ecosystem oriented to customer value propositions. Through the
business ecosystem, the competing enterprises will be trans-
formed into a community of common destiny to jointly realize
the value proposition on the demand side. In addition, digital
green innovation enterprises should change their value orienta-
tion. Build an ecosystem that promotes scientific and technolo-
gical research, industrial development, and commercial
application of digital green innovation based on demand. Form
a through-through digital green innovation chain and gather the
10 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
value propositions of all parties. Establish information resource
circulation mechanism and value flow mechanism based on value
co-creation behavior of digital green innovation. Only in this way
can the business ecosystem achieve iterative renewal. For the
innovation strategy of digital green enterprises, technology
investment oriented to digital green innovation business ecology
should be established. The application program interface is used
to provide data for each platform and realize data sharing.
Establish a digital, green, and innovative production ecosystem
with suppliers. Use big data to track and analyze the digital traces
of user consumption. Establish DGVCB mechanism of products
or services with users. So as to improve the consumption
ecosystem, further complete the innovation iteration of the
business ecosystem, and enhance the DGIP of enterprises.
Thirdly, digital green innovation enterprises should correctly
understand the phenomenon of network hierarchical fracture and
make full use of the advantages brought by digital green network
hierarchical fracture. Under the effect of the DGNF, multiple
subgroup structures are formed in the business ecosystem, and
the digital green innovation enterprises within these subgroup
structures trust and cooperate with each other. therefore, digital
green innovation enterprises should make full use of this
advantage to establish high-quality cooperation mechanisms
and information communication channels with other enterprises
within the subgroup structure. Carry out technical exchange
activities and share the customer value proposition with other
enterprises. Promote the development of digital green innovation
in the business ecosystem and the improvement of the break-
through digital green innovation ability of enterprises themselves.
Research limitation. This paper studies the influence mechanism
of digital green value co-creation on DGIP under the background
of digital economy, which provides theoretical support for the
governance of business ecosystem and the formulation of coop-
eration strategies for digital green innovation enterprises. How-
ever, due to the diversity of business ecosystem structure and the
need for digital green value co-creation to build different ways of
value acquisition according to specific industry conditions, this
study did not give a comprehensive explanation.
Future research prospects. Future researchers can use taxonomic
methods to further study the evolution and governance of busi-
ness ecosystems. In addition, since the behavior of digital green
value co-creation needs to build different value acquisition
methods according to the specific industry conditions, the future
research can be conducted on the construction of different value
acquisition methods in different industries, so as to make the
research conclusions more constructive and targeted, and provide
more specific theoretical guidance for the construction and
management of business ecosystems with different structures.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and analyzed during the current study
are not publicly available due to data protection obligations but are
available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Received: 14 March 2023; Accepted: 19 January 2024;
References
Adner R (2017) Ecosystem as structure: an actionable construct for strategy. J
Manag 43(1):39–58
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
Anshu K, Shankar A, Behl A, Pereira V, Laker B (2022) Impact of barriers of value
co-creation on consumers’ innovation resistance behavior: investigating the
moderation role of the DART model. Technol Forecast Soc Change
184:122033
Aquilani B, Piccarozzi M, Abbate T, Codin A (2020) The role of open innovation
and value co-creation in the challenging transition from industry 4.0 to
society 5.0: toward a theoretical framework. Sustainability 12(21):8943
Ardito L, Raby S, Albino V, Bertoldi B (2021) The duality of digital and envir-
onmental orientations in the context of SMEs: implications for innovation
performance. J Bus Res 123:44–56
Balzer R, Užík M, Glova J (2020) Managing growth opportunities in the digital
era–an empiric perspective of value creation. Pol J Manag Stud 21:87–100
Barile S, Bassano C, Piciocchi P, Saviano M, Spohrer JC (2021) Empowering value
co-creation in the digital age. J Bus Ind Market https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-
12-2019-0553
Bleier A, De Keyser A, Verleye K (2018) Customer engagement through perso-
nalization and customization. Customer Engagem Mark 82:75–94
Calik E, Bardudeen F (2016) A measurement scale to evaluate sustainable innovation
performance in manufacturing organizations. Procedia Cirp 40:449–454
Chandna V, Salimath MS (2022) Co-creation of value in platform-dependent
entrepreneurial ventures. Electron Commer Res 11:1–30. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10660-022-09574-4
Chang CH (2019) Do green motives influence green product innovation? The
mediating role of green value co‐creation. Corp Soc Responsib Environ
Manag 26(2):330–340
Charterina J, Landeta J, Basterretxea I (2018) Mediation effects of trust and con-
tracts on knowledge-sharing and product innovation: evidence from the
European machine tool industry. Eur J Innov Manag 21(2):274–293
Chekfoung T, Sunil D, Binita G (2020) Conceptualising capabilities and value co-
creation in a digital business ecosystem (DBE): a systematic literature review.
J Inf Syst Eng Manag 5(1):em0112
Dong T, Yin S, Zhang N (2023) New energy-driven construction industry: digital
green innovation investment project selection of photovoltaic building
materials enterprises using an integrated fuzzy decision approach. Systems
11(1):11
Dong T, Yin S, Zhang N (2023) The interaction mechanism and dynamic evolution
of digital green innovation in the integrated green building supply chain.
Systems 11(3):122
Fan X, Luo Y (2020) Value co-creation: a literature review. Open J Soc Sci 8(02):89
Feng S, Zhang R, Li G (2022) Environmental decentralization, digital finance and
green technology innovation. Struct Change Economic Dyn 61:70–83
Freudenreich B, Lüdeke-Freund F, Schaltegger S (2020) A stakeholder theory
perspective on business models: value creation for sustainability. J Bus Ethics
166:3–18
Gardner TA, Benzie M, Börner J, Dawkins E, Fick S, Garrett R, Wolvekamp P
(2019) Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains.
World Dev 121:163–177
Goetz F, Türkmen I, Buck C, Meckl R (2022) Investigating social factors and their
impact on value co-creation in supply chain ecosystems. J Glob Oper Stra-
tegic Sourc 16(1):69–89
Grönroos C, Voima P (2013) Critical service logic: making sense of value creation
and co-creation. J Acad Mark Sci 41(2):133–150
Guo H, Yang Z, Huang R, Guo A (2020) The digitalization and public crisis
responses of small and medium enterprises: Implications from a COVID-19
survey. Front Bus Res China 14:1–25
Han Y (2022) The effect of network embedding on innovation performance: based
on the moderating effect of knowledge distance. Front Bus, Econ Manag
3(2):64–68
Hatani F (2020) Artificial Intelligence in Japan: Policy, prospects, and obstacles in the
automotive industry. Transforming Jpn Bus: Rising digital Chall, 12:211–226
Heikka EL, Frandsen T, Hsuan J (2018) Matching value propositions with varied
customer needs: the role of service modularity. Knowl process Manag
25(1):64–73
Herskovits R, Grijalbo M, Tafur J (2013) Understanding the main drivers of value
creation in an open innovation program. Int Entrepreneurship Manag J
9:631–640
Kala D, Chaubey DS (2023) Cryptocurrency adoption and continuance intention
among Indians: moderating role of perceived government control. Digital
Policy, Regul Gov 25(3):288–304
Kang S, Na YK (2020) Effects of strategy characteristics for sustainable competitive
advantage in sharing economy businesses on creating shared value and
performance. Sustainability 12(4):1397
Kaur P, Dhir A, Talwar S, Ghuman K (2021) The value proposition of food delivery
apps from the perspective of theory of consumption value. Int J Contemp
Hospitality Manag 33(4):1129–1159
Kuo CC, Shyu JZ, Ding K (2019) Industrial revitalization via industry 4.0-A
comparative policy analysis among China, Germany and the USA. Glob
Transit 1:3–14
HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5
ARTICLE
Lan J, Ma Y, Zhu D, Mangalagiu D, Thornton TF (2017) Enabling value co-
creation in the sharing economy: the case of mobike. Sustainability
9(9):1504
Li G, Wu J, Li N (2022) Identifying the value co-creation model and upgrading
path of manufacturing enterprises from the value network perspective. Sus-
tainability 14(23):16008
Li J, Chen L, Chen Y, He J (2022) Digital economy, technological innovation, and
green economic efficiency—Empirical evidence from 277 cities in China.
Manag Decis Econ 43(3):616–629
Li X, He J, Huang Y, Liu X, Dai J (2022) Predicting the factors influencing con-
struction enterprises’ adoption of green development behaviors using artifi-
cial neural network. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 9(1):238
Liu L, Ding T, Wang H (2022) Digital economy, technological innovation and
green high-quality development of industry: a study case of China. Sustain-
ability 14(17):11078
Luo S, Yimamu N, Li Y, Wu H, Irfan M, Hao Y (2023) Digitalization and sus-
tainable development: how could digital economy development improve
green innovation in China? Bus Strategy Environ 32(4):1847–1871
Lyu T, Zhang Y, Zhang Y (2017) Enhancing the network embedding quality with
structural similarity. Proc 2017 ACM Conf Inf Knowl Manag 2:147–156
Ma R, Lin B (2023) Digital infrastructure construction drives green economic
transformation: evidence from Chinese cities. Humanities Soc Sci Commun
10(1):1–10
Ma Y, Rong K, Luo Y, Wang Y, Mangalagiu D, Thornton TF (2019) Value co-
creation for sustainable consumption and production in the sharing economy
in China. J Clean Prod 208:1148–1158
Mao S, Wang B, Tang Y, Qian F (2019) Opportunities and challenges of artificial
intelligence for green manufacturing in the process industry. Engineering
5(6):995–1002
Moran P (2005) Structural vs. relational embeddedness: social capital and man-
agerial performance. Strategic Manag J 26(12):1129–1151
Morgan-Thomas A, Dessart L, Veloutsou C (2020) Digital ecosystem and con-
sumer engagement: a socio-technical perspective. J Bus Res 121:713–723
Pan X, Song ML, Zhang J, Zhou G (2019) Innovation network, technological
learning and innovation performance of high-tech cluster enterprises. J
Knowl Manag 23(9):1729–1746
Payne A, Frow P, Eggert A (2017) The customer value proposition: evolution,
development, and application in marketing. J Acad Mark Sci 45(4):467–489
Pidun U, Reeves M, Schüssler M (2019) Do you need a business ecosystem. Boston
Consulting Group 7:27–34
Pidun U, Reeves M, Schüssler M (2020) How do you “design” a business ecosys-
tem? Boston Consulting Group 2:20–29
Piller FT, Ihl C, Vossen A (2010) A typology of customer co-creation in the
innovation process. RWTH Aachen Univ 2014:1–26
Pomegbe WWK, Li W, Dogbe CSK, Otoo COA (2020) Enhancing the innovation
performance of small and medium-sized enterprises through network
embedding. J Competitiveness 12(3):156
Qiu L, Jie X, Wang Y, Zhao M (2020) Green product Ainnovation, green dynamic
capability, and competitive advantage: evidence from Chinese manufacturing
enterprises. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 27(1):146–165
Ranjan KR, Read S (2016) Value co-creation: concept and measurement. J Acad
Mark Sci 44(3):290–315
Ritala P, Agouridas V, Assimakopoulos D, Gies O (2013) Value creation and
capture mechanisms in innovation ecosystems: a comparative case study. Int
J Technol Manag 63(4):244–267
Ritter T, Pedersen CL (2020) Digitization capability and the digitalization of
business models in business-to-business firms: past, present, and future. Ind
Mark Manag 86:180–190
Rong K, Li B, Peng W, Zhou D, Shi X (2021) Sharing economy platforms: creating
shared value at a business ecosystem level. Technol Forecast Soc Change
169:120804
Rong K, Lin Y, Shi Y, Yu J (2013) Linking business ecosystem lifecycle with
platform strategy: a triple view of technology, application and organisation.
Int J Technol Manag 62(1):75–94
Salvador F, Piller FT, Aggarwal S (2020) Surviving on the long tail: an empirical
investigation of business model elements for mass customization. Long Range
Plan 53(4):101886
Sarfraz M, Ozturk I, Yoo S, Raza MA, Han H (2023) Toward a new understanding
of environmental and financial performance through corporate social
responsibility, green innovation, and sustainable development. Humanities
Soc Sci Commun 10(1):1–17
Sashi CM (2021) Digital communication, value co-creation and customer
engagement in business networks: a conceptual matrix and propositions. Eur
J Mark 55(6):1643–1663
Shahatha Al-Mashhadani AF, Qureshi MI, Hishan SS, Md Saad MS, Vaicondam Y,
Khan N (2021) Towards the development of digital manufacturing ecosys-
tems for sustainable performance: learning from the past two decades of
research. Energies 14(10):2945
11
ARTICLE HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5

Shen W, Nie Y, Long C, Song Z, Zhang Q, Tang D (2022) Research on the
Mechanism of Collaborative Value Co-Creation of Enterprise–Science
Community: A Case Study Based on the Green Brand Maoduoli. Sustain-
ability 14(22):15439
Shi X, Lu L, Zhang W, Zhang Q (2020) Managing open innovation from a
knowledge flow perspective: the roles of embeddedness and network inertia
in collaboration networks. Eur J Innov Manag 24(3):1011–1034
Shrimali G, Agarwal N, Donovan C (2020) Drivers of solar deployment in India: a
state-level econometric analysis. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 133:110137
Sumaira, Siddique HMA (2023) Industrialization, energy consumption, and
environmental pollution: evidence from South Asia. Environ Sci Pollut Res
30(2):4094–4102
Tajvidi M, Wang Y, Hajli N, Love PE (2021) Brand value co-creation in social
commerce: the role of interactivity, social support, and relationship quality.
Comput Hum Behav 115:105238
Valaei N, Rezaei S, Bressolles G, Dent MM (2022) Indispensable components of
creativity, innovation, and FMCG companies’ competitive performance: a
resource-based view (RBV) of the firm. Asia-Pac J Bus Adm 14(1):1–26
Wagner T, Herrmann C, Thiede S (2017) Industry 4.0 impacts on lean production
systems. Procedia Cirp 63:125–131
Wang D, Cui P, Zhu W (2016) Structural deep network embedding. Proc 22nd
ACM SIGKDD Int Conf Knowl Discov Data Min 3:1225–1234
Wu Y, Liu W (2022) How does corporate network embeddedness affect value co-
creation?—A single case study of Lychee. Manag Case Stud Rev 3:303–317
Xu J, Liu F, Shang Y (2021) R&D investment, ESG performance and green inno-
vation performance: evidence from China. Kybernetes 50(3):737–756
Yang H, Zhu X (2022) Research on green innovation performance of manu-
facturing industry and its improvement path in China. Sustainability
14(13):8000
Yang Y, Dang X, Cheng L (2018) Research on splitting and alienation of split fault
in technological innovation network. Proc 2018 Int Conf Inf Hiding Image
Process 6:88–93
Yin S, Yu Y (2022) An adoption-implementation framework of digital green
knowledge to improve the performance of digital green innovation practices
for industry 5.0. J Clean Prod 363:132608
Yin S, Dong T, Li B, Gao S (2022) Developing a conceptual partner selection
framework: digital green innovation management of prefabricated con-
struction enterprises for sustainable urban development. Buildings
12(6):721
Yin S, Liu L, Mahmood T (2023) New Trends in Sustainable Development for
Industry 5.0: Digital Green Innovation Economy. Green Low-Carbon Econ
4:1–13. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewGLCE32021584
Yin S, Zhang N, Ullah K, Gao S (2022) Enhancing digital innovation for the
sustainable transformation of manufacturing industry: a pressure-state-
response system framework to perceptions of digital green innovation and its
performance for green and intelligent manufacturing. Systems 10(3):72
Zahra SA, Liu W, Si S (2023) How digital technology promotes entrepreneurship in
ecosystems. Technovation 119:102457
Zhang L (2021) An Empirical Study on the Innovation Performance of Regional
(Enterprise) by Dual Network Embedding in E-commerce Environment. Int J
Front Sociol 3(12):23–56
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Philosophy and Social Sciences Planning Project of the
Ministry of Education grant number [21YJCZH203], the Soft Science Special Project of
Hebei Innovation Capability Enhancement Program grant number [21557635D], Social
Science Fund project of Hebei Province grant number [HB21YJ003] and Top Young
Talents Scientific Research Project of Higher Education in Hebei Province grant number
[BJ2021084].
Author contributions
Conceptualization, Y.S. and Z.Y.D.; methodology, Y.S.; software, Y.S.; validation, Z.Y.D.
and Y.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.Y.D.; writing—review and editing, Y.S.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of
the university. Ethical clearance and approval were granted by Hebei Agricultural Uni-
versity (jgy23085).
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to Shi Yin.
Reprints and permission information is available at http://www.nature.com/reprints
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative
Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party
material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless
indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the
article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory
regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/.
© The Author(s) 2024

12 HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS | (2024)11:228 | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02691-5