In an era where technology and environmental sustainability intersect more than ever, the latest research paper by ZHU Jianhua and colleagues, titled “Using blockchain or not? A focal firm’s blockchain strategy in the context of carbon emission reduction technology innovation,” published in the journal “Business Strategy and the Environment” in 2024, embarks on an explorative journey into the nuanced domain of blockchain application within low-carbon supply chains. This groundbreaking study sheds light on a pivotal question that firms across the globe are grappling with: Does the integration of blockchain technology in the pursuit of carbon emission reduction (CER) initiatives enhance brand awareness and market expansion at the cost of diminishing resources for research and development (R&D) or eroding profits?
The research meticulously dissects the implications of blockchain adoption for firms with varying brand strengths, categorizing them into superior and inferior brand firms, to evaluate the impact on their CER efforts and profitability. The paper emerges against the backdrop of increasing blockchain applications in enhancing the traceability of low-carbon products, a feature that significantly bolsters consumer trust and brand recognition. However, the operational and construction costs associated with blockchain technologies present a conundrum for companies dedicated to R&D in carbon emission reduction technologies.
The study unveils that the decision to employ blockchain technology is not universally advantageous for CER and profit augmentation. Several critical factors come into play, including consumers’ trust, their preference for low-carbon products, the brand’s market presence, and the inherent costs of blockchain operation and infrastructure. Specifically, the paper argues that firms with a well-established brand can leverage blockchain to improve their CER outcomes and profitability under certain conditions, such as when R&D challenges are manageable and consumer trust is high or when brand awareness and consumer preference for low-carbon options significantly outweigh the R&D hurdles.
Conversely, for firms with lesser-known brands, the strategic deployment of blockchain can be beneficial in enhancing CER and profitability, particularly when they navigate the R&D landscape adeptly and enjoy high consumer trust or when they operate in markets where brand recognition is less critical.
By employing Stackelberg models, the researchers provide a nuanced analysis of the strategic calculus that firms must undertake when deciding whether to integrate blockchain technology into their environmental strategy. The study not only contributes to the academic discourse on blockchain’s role in sustainable business practices but also offers pragmatic insights for corporate strategists contemplating blockchain adoption in their CER initiatives.
While the paper presents a comprehensive framework for understanding the strategic dimensions of blockchain use in CER, it also acknowledges its limitations, including a simplified market model and the absence of empirical validation. These caveats underscore the complexity of real-world market dynamics and the evolving nature of blockchain technology and environmental policies.
Looking ahead, the research calls for a more granular exploration of blockchain’s potential in facilitating low-carbon innovation, suggesting future studies to incorporate empirical data, dynamic market models, and the evolving landscape of technology and regulation. This pioneering work stands as a testament to the intricate interplay between blockchain technology and environmental sustainability, paving the way for future inquiries into the strategic deployment of blockchain in achieving a greener future.
