Boosting the efficacy of green accounting for better firm performance: artificial intelligence and accounting quality as moderators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to deepen our understanding of how conventional technologies and robust accounting education standards can impact the effectiveness of green accounting practices in enhancing firm performance. To achieve this, the paper explores the moderating effects of artificial intelligence (AI) and accounting education quality on the relationship between green accounting and firm performance. Design/methodology/approach Using generalized method of moments estimation, this research uses a comprehensive dataset comprising 32,680 firm-year observations of listed companies from ten prominent countries – Canada, the UK, the USA, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea and Italy – over the period from 2012 to 2022. These countries, selected based on their high gross domestic product rankings as reported by the International Monetary Fund, ensure a diverse representation of economic strengths and capture a wide range of green accounting practices. Findings The study shows that green accounting practices positively impact current firm performance. Country-level AI positively moderates this relationship, suggesting that advanced AI infrastructure enhances the benefits of green accounting through improved data accuracy and decision-making. However, country-level accountancy education quality negatively moderates the relationship, indicating that stringent implementation of green accounting standards in these regions may introduce complexities and costs that reduce firm performance. Practical implications Integrating AI enhances data processing, predictive analytics and decision-making, improving green accounting effectiveness. High-quality accounting education ensures accurate reporting and greater transparency. These insights, when applied, can empower businesses to optimize sustainability strategies, assist policymakers in developing targeted regulations and guide educators in preparing accountants for the evolving demands of green accounting. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the combined moderating effects of AI and accounting education quality on the relationship between green accounting and firm performance. By highlighting the synergistic role of digital innovation and robust educational standards, this research offers novel insights into how these factors can enhance the effectiveness of green accounting practices and improve financial outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".