Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration
Research Article  ·  Published: 10 September 2026
Issue cover
Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
Volume 2, Issue 3, 2026: 159-176
Research Article Open Access

Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration

1 Department of Business Administration, Dongshin University, Jeollanam-do 58245, Republic of Korea
* Corresponding Author: Fang Sun, [email protected]
Volume 2, Issue 3
You have full access to this open access article · CC BY 4.0 License

Article Information

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) investment, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure, and green supply chain collaboration increasingly operate as an interconnected corporate sustainability system, yet their relationships are commonly examined through static or approximately linear models. This study develops a bounded three-dimensional discrete nonlinear framework in which firms periodically adjust AI-investment maturity, ESG disclosure quality, and green supply chain collaboration in response to cross-domain benefits and self-limiting organizational costs. The model contributes by separating structural complementarity from organizational responsiveness, allowing the same long-run configuration to remain feasible while its dynamic stability changes with adjustment speed. A logit adaptive rule keeps all states within the open unit interval, while Hill-type functions capture activation thresholds and saturation. Under the baseline calibration, the system exhibits three interior fixed points: stable low- and high-complementarity regimes separated by an unstable intermediate state. Schur-Jury analysis establishes local stability conditions, and Neimark--Sacker analysis shows that the low and high regimes lose stability at distinct responsiveness thresholds, with subcritical and supercritical bifurcations, respectively. Along the high-regime branch, increasing responsiveness generates quasiperiodic motion, intermittent chaotic subwindows, and re-entrant stable period-3 behavior. A positive leading Lyapunov exponent confirms deterministic chaos, while multi-start diagnostics show that quasiperiodic and chaotic dynamics can coexist with a stable period-3 attractor under different initial conditions over part of the parameter range. The findings show that stronger AI-ESG-green-supply-chain complementarity does not imply that faster organizational adjustment is always beneficial. Effective governance must therefore consider not only the strength of cross-domain reinforcement but also the pacing and damping of organizational responses.

Graphical Abstract

Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration

Keywords

artificial intelligence investment ESG disclosure green supply chain collaboration organizational responsiveness multistability

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Funding

This work was supported without any funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

AI Use Statement

The author declares that no generative AI was used in the preparation of this manuscript.

Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

References

  1. Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889-901.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Ismagilova, E., Aarts, G., Coombs, C., Crick, T., ... & Williams, M. D. (2021). Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International journal of information management, 57, 101994.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Raisch, S., & Krakowski, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation–augmentation paradox. Academy of management review, 46(1), 192-210.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Berente, N., Gu, B., Recker, J., & Santhanam, R. (2021). Managing artificial intelligence. MIS quarterly, 45(3), 1433-1450.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Xie, X., Zhu, H., & Zhao, J. (2024). How effective is digital transformation? Heterogeneous insights from listed companies’ ESG performance. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1534.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Sun, Y., Wu, J., Huang, T. K., Davey, H., & Lu, Y. (2026). Is ESG transparency the fruit of corporate digitalization: Strategic pathways to enhanced ESG disclosure? Business Strategy and the Environment, 35(3), 3923-3951.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Li, J., & Jin, X. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence adoption intensity on corporate sustainability performance: The moderated mediation effect of organizational change. Sustainability, 16(21), 9350.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Akram, R., Shi, X., Khalid, F., & Srivastava, M. (2025). Artificial intelligence (AI) adoption and green investment: Driving corporate environmental responsibility. Business Strategy and the Environment, 34(7), 9188-9202.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fang, M., Nie, H., & Shen, X. (2023). Can enterprise digitization improve ESG performance? Economic Modelling, 118, 106101.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhong, Y., Zhao, H., & Yin, T. (2023). Resource bundling: How does enterprise digital transformation affect enterprise ESG development? Sustainability, 15(2), 1319.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cheng, W., Li, Q., Wu, Q., Ye, F., & Jiang, Y. (2024). Digital capability and green innovation: The perspective of green supply chain collaboration and top management's environmental awareness. Heliyon, 10(11), e32290.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Benzidia, S., Makaoui, N., & Bentahar, O. (2021). The impact of big data analytics and artificial intelligence on green supply chain process integration and hospital environmental performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 165, 120557.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lerman, L. V., Benitez, G. B., M\"{uller, J. M., de Sousa, P. R., & Frank, A. G. (2022). Smart green supply chain management: A configurational approach to enhance green performance through digital transformation. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 27(7), 147-176.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Al-Omoush, K. S., de Lucas, A., & del Val, M. T. (2023). The role of e-supply chain collaboration in collaborative innovation and value co-creation. Journal of Business Research, 158, 113647.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role of collaboration in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 299-315.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wong, C. Y., Wong, C. W., & Boon-itt, S. (2020). Effects of green supply chain integration and green innovation on environmental and cost performance. International journal of production research, 58(15), 4589-4609.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ying, Z., Chang, T. C., Moslehpour, M., Ismail, S., & Pardaev, J. (2026). Driving Sustainability Through CSR, Artificial Intelligence, and Green Supply Chain; The Role of Green Innovation Capabilities & Digital Maturity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Feroz, A. K., Zo, H., Eom, J., & Chiravuri, A. (2023). Identifying organizations' dynamic capabilities for sustainable digital transformation: A mixed methods study. Technology in Society, 73, 102257.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Arranz, C. F. A. (2024). A system dynamics approach to modelling eco-innovation drivers in companies: Understanding complex interactions using machine learning. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(5), 4456-4479.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Strogatz, S. H. (2018). Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: With applications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering (2nd ed.). CRC Press.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuznetsov, Y. A. (1998). Elements of applied bifurcation theory. New York, NY: Springer New York. https://research-portal.uu.nl/en/publications/elements-of-applied-bifurcation-theory/
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lu, Y., Xu, C., Zhu, B., & Sun, Y. (2024). Digitalization transformation and ESG performance: Evidence from China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 352-368.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang, L., & Hou, S. (2024). The impact of digital transformation and earnings management on ESG performance: evidence from Chinese listed enterprises. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 783.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Liu, Z., Chen, Z., & Hu, L. (2024). Can enterprise digital transformation improve ESG performance?. Managerial and Decision Economics, 45(7), 5088-5103.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Zhang, H., Liu, J., & Jiang, H. (2025). The impact of enterprise digital transformation on ESG performance: Evidence from China. Managerial and Decision Economics, 46(5), 3157-3171.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Liu, H., Zhang, X., & He, Y. (2025). Digital transformation and ESG performance: Empirical evidence from Chinese listed companies. Sustainability, 17(13), 6165.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wang, L., Kong, L., & Zeng, H. (2026). Firm digitalisation empowers ESG performance-evidence from China. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 31(2), 1860-1879.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Rauf, F. (2026). Green AI adoption and ESG disclosure quality: The role of audit committee gender diversity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. Advance online publication.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  29. Asif, M., Searcy, C., & Castka, P. (2023). ESG and Industry 5.0: The role of technologies in enhancing ESG disclosure. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 195, 122806.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Ding, X., Sheng, Z., Appolloni, A., Shahzad, M., & Han, S. (2024). Digital transformation, ESG practice, and total factor productivity. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(5), 4547-4561.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. He, Y., Li, J., & Ren, Y. (2024). Digital transformation and corporate ESG information disclosure herd effect. Finance Research Letters, 65, 105557.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  32. Janssen, M., Brous, P., Estevez, E., Barbosa, L. S., & Janowski, T. (2020). Data governance: Organizing data for trustworthy artificial intelligence. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101493.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of corporate finance, 66, 101889.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Mäntymäki, M., Minkkinen, M., Birkstedt, T., & Viljanen, M. (2022). Defining organizational AI governance. AI and Ethics, 2(4), 603-609.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. Wu, Q., Khattak, M. S., Anwar, M., & Nevries, P. (2026). Artificial intelligence and environmental, social, and governance: A hybrid bibliometric approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 35(4), 5749-5775.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Cousins, P. D., Lawson, B., Petersen, K. J., & Fugate, B. (2019). Investigating green supply chain management practices and performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 39(5), 767-786.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. Han, Z., & Huo, B. (2020). The impact of green supply chain integration on sustainable performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(4), 657-674.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of cleaner production, 16(15), 1699-1710.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Geng, Y. (2005). Green supply chain management in China: Pressures, practices and performance. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(5), 449-468.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhao, J., Ragmoun, W., Dong, Z., Nawaz, M. A., & Sattarov, A. (2026). Circular economy implementation through AI adoption, CSR and green finance: The mediating role of green product innovation and green supply chain. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 33(2), 2432-2447.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Liu, X., Chau, K. Y., Chang, T. C., & Moslehpour, M. (2026). Driving sustainable performance through green business strategy, artificial intelligence capability, and green supply chain management: the mediating roles of knowledge integration and green innovation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 33(3), 4531-4546.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang, Y., Yang, Y., Qin, Z., Yang, Y., & Li, J. (2023). A literature review on the application of digital technology in achieving green supply chain management. Sustainability, 15(11), 8564.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wang, S., & Zhang, H. (2024). Inter-organizational cooperation in digital green supply chains: A catalyst for eco-innovations and sustainable business practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 472, 143383.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. Al-Khatib, A. W. (2022). Big data analytics capabilities and green supply chain performance: investigating the moderated mediation model for green innovation and technological intensity. Business Process Management Journal, 28(5-6), 1446-1471.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. Umar, M., Khan, S. A. R., Yusoff Yusliza, M., Ali, S., & Yu, Z. (2022). Industry 4.0 and green supply chain practices: an empirical study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 71(3), 814-832.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. Behl, A., Gaur, J., Pereira, V., Yadav, R., & Laker, B. (2022). Role of big data analytics capabilities to improve sustainable competitive advantage of MSME service firms during COVID-19–A multi-theoretical approach. Journal of Business Research, 148, 378-389.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. Abbas, A., Luo, X., Shahzad, F., & Wattoo, M. U. (2023). Optimizing organizational performance in manufacturing: The role of IT capability, green supply chain integration, and green innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 423, 138848.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  48. Li, G., Yu, H., & Lu, M. (2022). Low-carbon collaboration in the supply chain under digital transformation: An evolutionary game-theoretic analysis. Processes, 10(10), 1958.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. Li, W., Xiao, X., Yang, X., & Li, L. (2023). How does digital transformation impact green supply chain development? An empirical analysis based on the TOE theoretical framework. Systems, 11(8), 416.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  50. Bae, H. S., & Dong, J. X. (2026). Relationships between corporate resources, green supply chain collaboration and environmental performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 1-19.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  51. Roberto, F. R. A., Lerman, L. V., & Benitez, G. B. (2026). Configuring digital supply chains for green supply chain management. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 37(3), 599-619.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  52. Song, M., Yang, M. X., Zeng, K. J., Wang, C., & Wang, F. (2026). Unlocking green innovation through big data analytics capability: A moderated mediation model of green supply chain integration and green leadership style. Business Strategy and the Environment. Advance online publication.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  53. Ardito, L. (2023). The influence of firm digitalization on sustainable innovation performance and the moderating role of corporate sustainability practices: An empirical investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(8), 5252-5272.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  54. Daios, A., & Kostavelis, I. (2026). Artificial intelligence and sustainable supply chain performance: A trade-off-aware evaluation framework. Sustainability, 18(12), 5907.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  55. Elaydi, S. (2005). An introduction to difference equations (3rd ed.). Springer.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  56. Margazoglou, G., & Magri, L. (2023). Stability analysis of chaotic systems from data. Nonlinear Dynamics, 111(9), 8799-8819.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  57. Hale, J. K., & Ko\c{cak, H. (1991). Dynamics and bifurcations. Springer.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  58. Eccles, R. G., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). The impact of corporate sustainability on organizational processes and performance. Management science, 60(11), 2835-2857.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  59. Flammer, C. (2015). Does corporate social responsibility lead to superior financial performance? A regression discontinuity approach. Management science, 61(11), 2549-2568.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Cite This Article

APA Style
Sun, F. (2026). Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration. Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications, 2(3), 159-176. https://doi.org/10.62762/JNDA.2026.451847
Export Citation
RIS Format
Compatible with EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, and other reference managers
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Sun, Fang
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/10
TI  - Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration
JO  - Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
T2  - Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
JF  - Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
SP  - 159
EP  - 176
DO  - 10.62762/JNDA.2026.451847
UR  - https://www.icck.org/article/abs/JNDA.2026.451847
KW  - artificial intelligence investment
KW  - ESG disclosure
KW  - green supply chain collaboration
KW  - organizational responsiveness
KW  - multistability
AB  - Artificial intelligence (AI) investment, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure, and green supply chain collaboration increasingly operate as an interconnected corporate sustainability system, yet their relationships are commonly examined through static or approximately linear models. This study develops a bounded three-dimensional discrete nonlinear framework in which firms periodically adjust AI-investment maturity, ESG disclosure quality, and green supply chain collaboration in response to cross-domain benefits and self-limiting organizational costs. The model contributes by separating structural complementarity from organizational responsiveness, allowing the same long-run configuration to remain feasible while its dynamic stability changes with adjustment speed. A logit adaptive rule keeps all states within the open unit interval, while Hill-type functions capture activation thresholds and saturation. Under the baseline calibration, the system exhibits three interior fixed points: stable low- and high-complementarity regimes separated by an unstable intermediate state. Schur-Jury analysis establishes local stability conditions, and Neimark--Sacker analysis shows that the low and high regimes lose stability at distinct responsiveness thresholds, with subcritical and supercritical bifurcations, respectively. Along the high-regime branch, increasing responsiveness generates quasiperiodic motion, intermittent chaotic subwindows, and re-entrant stable period-3 behavior. A positive leading Lyapunov exponent confirms deterministic chaos, while multi-start diagnostics show that quasiperiodic and chaotic dynamics can coexist with a stable period-3 attractor under different initial conditions over part of the parameter range. The findings show that stronger AI-ESG-green-supply-chain complementarity does not imply that faster organizational adjustment is always beneficial. Effective governance must therefore consider not only the strength of cross-domain reinforcement but also the pacing and damping of organizational responses.
SN  - 3069-6313
PB  - Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge
LA  - English
ER  - 
BibTeX Format
Compatible with LaTeX, BibTeX, and other reference managers
@article{Sun2026Organizati,
  author = {Fang Sun},
  title = {Organizational Responsiveness in a Three-Dimensional Discrete Model of AI, ESG Disclosure, and Green Supply Chain Collaboration},
  journal = {Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications},
  year = {2026},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {159-176},
  doi = {10.62762/JNDA.2026.451847},
  url = {https://www.icck.org/article/abs/JNDA.2026.451847},
  abstract = {Artificial intelligence (AI) investment, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosure, and green supply chain collaboration increasingly operate as an interconnected corporate sustainability system, yet their relationships are commonly examined through static or approximately linear models. This study develops a bounded three-dimensional discrete nonlinear framework in which firms periodically adjust AI-investment maturity, ESG disclosure quality, and green supply chain collaboration in response to cross-domain benefits and self-limiting organizational costs. The model contributes by separating structural complementarity from organizational responsiveness, allowing the same long-run configuration to remain feasible while its dynamic stability changes with adjustment speed. A logit adaptive rule keeps all states within the open unit interval, while Hill-type functions capture activation thresholds and saturation. Under the baseline calibration, the system exhibits three interior fixed points: stable low- and high-complementarity regimes separated by an unstable intermediate state. Schur-Jury analysis establishes local stability conditions, and Neimark--Sacker analysis shows that the low and high regimes lose stability at distinct responsiveness thresholds, with subcritical and supercritical bifurcations, respectively. Along the high-regime branch, increasing responsiveness generates quasiperiodic motion, intermittent chaotic subwindows, and re-entrant stable period-3 behavior. A positive leading Lyapunov exponent confirms deterministic chaos, while multi-start diagnostics show that quasiperiodic and chaotic dynamics can coexist with a stable period-3 attractor under different initial conditions over part of the parameter range. The findings show that stronger AI-ESG-green-supply-chain complementarity does not imply that faster organizational adjustment is always beneficial. Effective governance must therefore consider not only the strength of cross-domain reinforcement but also the pacing and damping of organizational responses.},
  keywords = {artificial intelligence investment, ESG disclosure, green supply chain collaboration, organizational responsiveness, multistability},
  issn = {3069-6313},
  publisher = {Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge}
}

Article Metrics

Citations
Crossref
0
Scopus
0
Views
35
PDF Downloads
6

Publisher's Note

ICCK stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and Permissions

CC BY Copyright © 2026 by the Author(s). Published by Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.
Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
Journal of Nonlinear Dynamics and Applications
ISSN: 3069-6313 (Online)
Portico
Preserved at
Portico