Purpose Although the role of green artificial intelligence (Green AI) in firm innovation has been widely examined, its influence on social value remains insufficiently understood. Moreover, empirical evidence on how digital leadership facilitates the effective integration of Green AI into environmental management systems is limited. This study aims to (1) examine the impact of Green AI capability on social performance through internal environmental management systems, particularly environmental management accounting (EMA) and (2) investigate whether the synergy between digital leadership and Green AI capability enhances the effectiveness of EMA in a sustainable management context. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative research design was employed using survey data collected from 235 chief executive officers and chief financial officers of Vietnamese manufacturing firms. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling was conducted using SmartPLS version 4.1.1.2. Findings The results indicate that Green AI capability significantly enhances the effectiveness of EMA systems. Furthermore, EMA extends beyond traditional financial and environmental boundaries to positively influence firms’ social performance. The findings also demonstrate that digital leadership strengthens the relationship between Green AI capability and EMA effectiveness, creating a synergistic effect that improves sustainable management outcomes. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by clarifying the mechanisms through which Green AI improves internal environmental management systems. While prior research has primarily emphasized the role of Green AI capability in innovation and financial performance, this study highlights its contribution to social performance through the mediating role of EMA. Additionally, the findings underscore the importance of digital leadership in fostering an organizational environment that enables Green AI to be more deeply embedded within accounting and management systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Van et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: