The mechanism of how corporate environmental responsibility influences sustainability

Current scientific literature lacks a comprehensive theoretical explanation of how corporate environmental responsibility (CER) translates into sustainability in the context of digital business transformation (DBT). The aim of this study is to develop and substantiate a conceptual model of this mechanism. The methodological framework includes a systemic and comparative analysis, a synthesis of stakeholder theories, the resource-based view, signaling theory, and Porter’s hypothesis, as well as an analysis of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RUIE) ESG index data for 2014–2023. The proposed model identifies four interconnected channels for transforming environmental practices into sustainability: financial and investment, operational efficiency, reputational and market, and innovation and strategic. It is substantiated that DBT acts not as an external factor, but as an integrating environment that enhances synergy between channels and makes the mechanism self-sustaining. Four management principles are formulated and a threelevel system of methodological recommendations (process, factor, and dynamic levels) is developed, enabling companies to systematically improve the return on environmental investments. The model’s applicability to Russian practice is demonstrated: leading companies in the RUIE ESG indices implement precisely the combination of channels defined in the model. The key conclusion of the article is that CER does not translate into sustainability in isolation, but through channel synergy, catalyzed by DBT, which requires companies to reconsider their planning horizons and management tools.

1. The sustainable development goals report / The United Nations. 2024. URL: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2024/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2024.pdf (date of access: 05.02.2026).

2. Global carbon emissions in 2023 / Z. Liu, Z. Deng, S.J. Davis, P. Ciais // Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. 2024. Vol. 5. Pp. 253–254. doi:10.1038/s43017-024-00532-2.

3. Akhmetshina L.G., Khomenko D.D. The impact of environmental factors on the financial performance of a mining and metallurgical company // Bulletin of the Altai Academy of Economics and Law. 2025. No. 122. Pp. 155–164. doi:10.17513/vaael.4441.

4. Morozov D.A. The impact of environmental investments on enterprise financial stability: the experience of strategy transformation at PJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel // Regional and branch economy. 2026. No. 3. Pp. 144–152. doi:10.47576/2949-1916.2026.3.3.018.

5. Digitalization as a foundation for ensuring energy efficiency in construction and housing and communal services / Kh.M. Gumba, E.I. Kiseleva, Ya.L. Sonin, I.S. Savvina // Journal of Economy and entrepreneurship. 2020. Vol. 14, No. 3. Pp. 1148–1153. doi:10.34925/EIP.2020.116.3.245.

6. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. Strategy & society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility // Harvard Business Review. 2006. Vol. 84. Pp. 78–85.

7. Veile J.W., Schmidt M., Voigt K. Toward a new era of cooperation: how industrial digital platforms transform business models in Industry 4.0 // Journal of Business Research. 2022. Vol. 143. Pp. 387–405. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.062.

8. A paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: descriptive, instrumental, and normative aspects / T. Hahn, F. Figge, J. Pinkse, L. Preuss // Journal of Business Ethics. 2018. Vol. 148. Pp. 235–248. doi:10.1007/s10551-017-3587-2.

9. Sheldon O. The philosophy of management. London : Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd, 1924. 291 p.

10. Dimitropoulos P., Koronios K. Corporate Environmental Responsibility, Accounting and Corporate Finance in the EU. Cham : Springer, 2021. 265 p. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72773-4.

11. Freeman R.E. The politics of stakeholder theory: some future directions // Business Ethics Quarterly. 1994. Vol. 4. Pp. 409–421. doi:10.2307/3857340.

12. Chabrak N. Promoting corporate social responsibility and sustainability: a model of integrity // Society and Business Review. 2015. Vol. 10, No. 3. Pp. 280–305. doi:10.1108/SBR-06-2015-0018.

13. Zhang Y., Ouyang Z. Doing well by doing good: how corporate environmental responsibility influences corporate financial performance // Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 2021. Vol. 28. Pp. 54–63. doi:10.1002/csr.2031.

14. Shlikhter A. Business strategies of companies in the context of sustainable development // World Eсonomy and International Relations. 2020. Vol. 64, No. 4. Pp. 37–44. doi:10.20542/0131-2227-2020-644-37-44.

15. By the end of the century, the global population could exceed 10 billion. URL: https://www.un.org/ru/desa/population-exceed-10-billion (date of access: 06.02.2026).

16. Elkington J. Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-Win-Win business strategies for sustainable development // California Management Review. 1994. Vol. 36, No. 2. Pp. 90–100. doi:10.2307/41165746.

17. 17. Zhang J., Nedospasova O.P. ESG disclosure standards: International and Chinese case studies // Siberian Financial School. 2024. No. 1 (153). Pp. 116–122. doi:10.34020/1993-4386-2024-1-116-122.