From green commitment to sustainable harvest: how digital capabilities and institutional pressure power agricultural sustainability

Purpose The objective of this study is to examine whether, and through which mechanisms, green corporate social responsibility (GCSR) integration improves sustainable farm performance in a climate-vulnerable emerging economy. Drawing on dynamic capabilities theory and institutional theory, the study analyses the mediating roles of green supply chain dynamic capabilities, sustainable agricultural innovation and digital technology capability, and the first-stage moderating role of coercive institutional pressure. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey of 420 farmers and agribusiness managers, purposively selected through agricultural extension offices in 30 districts across four Pakistani provinces, was conducted. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) with 10,000 bootstrap resamples was used to estimate the model, which contains three parallel mediators and three interaction terms. Measurement and structural model quality, predictive relevance, common-method bias, nonresponse bias and endogeneity were assessed through standard procedures. Findings GCSR integration has a significant direct effect on sustainable farm performance, but most of its effect is transmitted through capability building. Digital technology capability carries the largest indirect effect, followed by green supply chain dynamic capabilities and sustainable agricultural innovation. Coercive institutional pressure strengthens the conversion of GCSR into all three capabilities, the moderation is largest for digital capability, but the three moderation effects are not statistically distinguishable. The study concludes that green commitments improve farm sustainability only when they are converted into organizational capabilities, and that regulatory pressure accelerates this conversion. Research limitations/implications The cross-sectional, self-reported and purposive design limits causal inference and statistical generalization. Future studies should use longitudinal, multi-source and objective farm data and test normative and mimetic pressures. Practical implications Policymakers should pair environmental regulation with digital monitoring requirements, extension training and affordable digital infrastructure, while farm managers should treat GCSR as a capability-building program rather than a symbolic commitment. Originality/value The study differentiates three capability pathways through which GCSR becomes farm-level sustainability and treats coercive pressure as a first-stage condition of capability formation rather than a background constraint. It also provides farm-level evidence from a smallholder-dominated emerging economy, where prior work has focused on manufacturing and listed firms.