The Nexus Between Green Finance and Artificial Intelligence: A Systemic Bibliometric Analysis Based on Web of Science Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intersection of green finance and artificial intelligence (AI) represents a rapidly emerging and high-impact research domain with the potential to reshape sustainable economic systems. This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric and network analysis aimed at mapping the scientific landscape, identifying research hotspots, and highlighting methodological trends at this nexus. A dataset of 268 peer-reviewed publications (2014–June 2025) was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection, filtered by the Business Economics category. Analytical techniques employed include Bibliometrix in R, VOSviewer, and science mapping tools such as thematic mapping, trend topic analysis, co-citation networks, and co-occurrence clustering. Results indicate an annual growth rate of 53.31%, with China leading in both productivity and impact, followed by Vietnam and the United Kingdom. The most prolific affiliations and authors, primarily based in China, underscore a concentrated regional research output. The most relevant journals include Energy Economics and Finance Research Letters. Network visualizations identified 17 clusters, with focused analysis on the top three: (1) Emission, Health, and Environmental Risk, (2) Institutional and Technological Infrastructure, and (3) Green Innovation and Sustainable Urban Development. The methodological landscape is equally diverse, with top techniques including blockchain technology, large language models, convolutional neural networks, sentiment analysis, and structural equation modeling, demonstrating a blend of traditional econometrics and advanced AI. This study not only uncovers intellectual structures and thematic evolution but also identifies underdeveloped areas and proposes future research directions. These include dynamic topic modeling, regional case studies, and ethical frameworks for AI in sustainable finance. The findings provide a strategic foundation for advancing interdisciplinary collaboration and policy innovation in green AI–finance ecosystems.
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 | 0.006 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.118 | 0.154 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".