Guest editorial: Digital sustainability: customer experience, institutional readiness, and circular competence Free

The special issue Digital Sustainability explores the intersection of digital transformation and sustainability, bringing together research that addresses how digital technologies, practices and governance arrangements are shaping a more sustainable future. The theme across the issue is that integration across systems, sectors and disciplines, is required to bring about significant and lasting change. The authors emphasize that novelty or innovation for the sake of innovation only is not enough; it must be accompanied by social responsibility, economic viability and environmental stewardship.

Several articles in this issue address means by which digital technologies can help support organizational sustainability through improved decision-making, customer engagement and financial performance. Others address the promise of financial literacy, regulatory regimes and digital platforms to enable or hinder sustainable outcomes. Together, they illustrate that technology is no silver bullet, but rather a tool that needs to be thoughtfully introduced and supported by requisite infrastructure.

Another focus is on consumer behavior and the role of digital interfaces, such as marketing tools, chatbots and social media influencers, in shaping sustainable choices. This kind of research examines how experience and perception create action and how businesses can leverage digital interaction to align sustainability with customer expectation. Training and education of the workforce are also principal motifs that emerge. As digitalization reshapes industries, new competencies and skills that facilitate circular economies and inclusive growth are ever more needed. Articles in this issue cover how organizational culture, curricula and training must evolve to meet the needs of a digital and sustainable economy.

Finally, several papers address sectoral transformations in the areas of manufacturing, aquaculture, financial services and urban planning, offering a sense of how digital sustainability can be implemented in diverse contexts.

Collectively, the articles in this special issue offer a rich and multivectorial analysis of the intricate relationship between digital sustainability and innovation. They unveil both imperative threats, such as governance loopholes, digital exclusion and implementation challenges, and new possibilities for action. The set highlights the necessity for systems thinking and intersector collaboration to develop coordinated, inclusive and future-capable solutions.

With the world transforming at a fast rate digitally, organizations are redesigning customer experience (CX) as a sustainability influencer. Not only have digital platforms and technologies changed the way businesses engage with consumers, but they have also opened new pathways to fold sustainability into everyday encounters. This intersection of digitalization and sustainability poses new lens to understand and shape consumer behavior toward socially and environmentally conscious paths.

Saini (2025) provides a conceptual framework that unites the three legs of sustainability – social, environmental and economic, into the fabric of customer experience. The framework centers organizational practices in sync with consumer values, suggesting that improving quality of life, promoting sustainable consumption patterns and creating mutual economic benefit are essential to active engagement. The implication is clear: companies need to deliver customer experiences that surpass expectations, that is, improve quality of life to inspire sustainable living.

Grounded on this, Thakur et al. (2025) examine the mediating influence of digital marketing communication (DMC) on online customer experiences (OCE) and sustainable purchase intentions (SPI). Their finding is that the impact of DMC on SPI is strongly mediated by OCE, and they suggest to brands that usability, web design and emotional appeal should be at the top of the agenda. In addition, excessive interactivity can reduce customer satisfaction, suggesting a thin boundary in digital interface design.

Automated interactions and artificial intelligence also increasingly play their part in the creation of sustainable CX. Gomes et al. (2025) analyze how intelligent chatbots influence customer behavior and found that while chatbot experiences do elicit engagement, it does not necessarily reflect directly on behavioral intention unless enabled by meaningful interactions. This highlights the importance of emotional connection within technology-based service encounters.

The role of digital influencers also contributes to this context. Sousa et al. (2025) examine the power of sustainable digital influencers (DIs) to generate pro-environmental behavior. Though cognitive and leadership skills of DIs increase environmental concern and awareness, this may not necessarily be converted into behavior, exhibiting a critical gap between intention and action.

When combined, these studies present a balanced picture of the digital consumer. One who is empowered, connected and more aware of their surroundings, but who may not always engage in sustainable consumption. They require emotionally sensitive digital interfaces, socially integrated messaging and genuine engagement tactics that balance awareness and action. A related dimension is that of social innovation, which has emerged as a successful catalyst to tackle some of the most pressing issues of our times, including social justice, environmental sustainability and good governance (Lobo et al., 2024b). Rethinking the customer experience is essential to accelerating sustainability at scale, as digital experiences increasingly impact values and decisions.

Other significant contributions, although not included in this issue, provide helpful background to understanding digital sustainability. Lim et al. (2023) identified sustainable and green consumption as dominant topics in current consumer studies, citing growing academic and marketplace interest in sustainable consumption. This is corroborated by Wolny et al. (2025), which identified that digitally active consumers indicate significantly higher levels of environmental awareness, implying that digital involvement can be a catalyst for pro-environmental behavior and attitudes. Together, these results lend support for the relevance of integrating sustainability into customer experience strategy and reshaping consumer behavior in an increasingly digital and climate-aware world.

With digitalization in its wake, economic and social paradigms are being reshaped. The intersection of finance, innovation and sustainability thus becomes a key playing ground for system-level change. Financial innovation, through the use of fintech, RegTech and digital financial inclusion, equips new ammunition for chasing sustainability goals. However, the capacity of the innovations to be effectively converted into sustainable solutions depends on the readiness of institutions, the strength of regulatory design and the extent of stakeholder financial literacy.

Hidayat-ur-Rehman (2024) provides a solid explanation of how financial literacy is a central facilitator in the fintech adoption-sustainable firm performance linkage. According to the resource-based view (RBV) and technological innovation systems (TIS) theory, fintech adoption by itself does not necessarily guarantee improved sustainability performance. Instead, fintech success is contingent upon the firm’s internal abilities, more specifically, on its digital change efforts and external competitiveness strategy. Importantly, financial literacy is identified to operate as a moderator and support the firm’s ability to employ fintech tools and leverage the digital economy. This finding validates the proposition that human capital and knowledge are central intangible assets in the digital sustainability framework.

Similarly, Jannat (2025) looks at the possibility of crowdfinancing in addressing persistent funding requirements of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Bangladesh. Despite the fact that crowdfinancing has emerged as a worldwide disruptor of conventional finance, this study finds that adoption of the same in Bangladesh is plagued by intense challenges. The challenges include the absence of clearly defined legislative guidelines, dearth of technical appreciation among the entrepreneurs and weak digital infrastructure. Platforms such as Projekt.Co., GoRiseMe and Oporajoy are plagued with unreliability, which cuts down on investor confidence. Low financial literacy, hesitation in behavior and cultural norms all ensure that these issues are exacerbated. Jannat (2025) argues that to ensure that crowdfunding becomes a viable source of finance in the emerging markets, institutional reforms should be coordinated, there should be targeted awareness-raising campaigns and technology innovation, including blockchain integration.

Regulatorily speaking for digital finance, Izzat Ali Mustafa (2025) investigates the evolving role of monetary policy and prudential regulation under the backdrop of RegTech. Using a global panel vector autoregression (PVAR) model, the study estimates the impacts of digitalized regulatory tools on fundamental banking performance indicators such as return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE) and net interest margin (NIM). While traditional monetary tools have limited effects, prudential requirements, such as chiefly capital adequacy and liquidity ratios, have strong positive effects. The RegTech sandbox, a testing ground for innovative regulatory solutions in a sandboxed environment, is promising in improving performance measures, although its effects are best variable. This means that while there is promise in digital regulation, its implementation must be supported by mature digital ecosystems and adaptive policy environments.

Qazi (2025) broadens the scope by examining the extent to which general states of regulatory quality and institutions determine the long-term effect of new technologies in the future. The paper assesses various policy instruments, including ICT regulatory mechanisms, e-commerce regulations and data privacy laws, in determining the potential for development of frontier technologies such as AI, big data analytics and cloud computing. The findings confirm that the socioeconomic potential of technological innovation is enhanced by efficient and progressive regulation. More specifically, it is believed that transforming digital innovation into inclusive sustainable development requires the positive interplay of institutional trust, technological ripeness and regulatory clarity.

Concomitantly, promoting digital sustainability through financial innovation requires a system-wide effort, one that integrates education, governance and technology access. As stated by Lobo and Gorman (2025a) and Lobo et al. (2025b), intermediaries and governance structures in TIS are central enablers, pushing cross-sectoral partnership, accelerating knowledge diffusion, funding, sustainability transitions and adaptive organizational forms and transformational practices required for system change. Policymakers, regulators, financial institutions and innovators must work jointly in developing resilient, inclusive and forward-looking ecosystems.

In the same direction, Maldonado-Guzmán (2025) states that the lack of environmental awareness in organizations jeopardizes sustainable development. Hence, manufacturing firms should prioritize economic and financial performance as well as green and financial innovation to enable business transformation and sustainability. Similarly, Velychko et al. (2025) found that, in Ukraine, regional economic subsystems propel social subsystem development through self-financing firms, prioritizing institutional capacity. Furthermore, Alam et al. (2025) point out that quality institutions significantly reduce climate vulnerability, supporting the idea that institutional readiness is a driver of environmental resilience and sustainable development in the long term.

These studies collectively highlight a seminal finding: financial innovation is only capable of inducing sustainability if grounded in an institutional facilitating environment. Although Fintech, crowdfunding and Regtech have enormous potential, their effects rely on the fundamental levels of connectivity, financial knowledge and regulatory preparedness. Contextual considerations such as increasing market capacity restrictions and the uneven adoption of digital technologies must be considered when implementing new innovations. The experience gained from these submissions underscores the point that financial sustainability is not about new technology alone, but about the capabilities and commitments necessary for its deployment and massification.

Digitalization and sustainability are not technological or green problems so much as human and organizational ones. As industries approach circular economy (CE) strategies and sustainable innovation, the ability to build and transform competences is a make-or-break capacity. Within the CE perspective, Gruba et al. (2022) proposed a coevolutionary conception of transitions to sustainability, noting the ways in which TIS actors increasingly eschew linear treatment of the adoption of regenerative, innovation-led resource strategies. The achievement of these system transitions hinges on building the right talent, reorganizing organizational cultures and redesigning education and training programs to include the digital-sustainability interface.

Anshari and Ordóñez de Pablos (2025) make a valuable contribution by examining how skills building in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industry 4.0) facilitates the uptake of CE business models. The study’s conceptual framework lists “must-have” and “good-to-have” competencies that businesses require to restrategize and reoperate for a CE. While cross-functional cooperation, systems thinking and flexibility are desirable traits, process optimization, digital literacy and data analytics are core competencies. The authors stress that universities should update their curricula to include these competencies, which allow professionals and students to support CE practices that are focused on closed-loop production systems, waste reduction and long-term value creation. Their efforts support the expanding convergence of environmental consciousness and technological proficiency as a basis for sustainable business. This view is reinforced by Thompson-Bahm et al. (2025), who emphasize the relevance of human-centric innovation in the transition from Industry 4.0 to Industry 5.0, where competence and skills building are core components.

Whereas Anshari and Ordóñez de Pablos (2025) highlight building capability from both learning and strategic angles, Abdelwahed et al. (2025) shift their focus to exploring the role played by digital enablers on sustainability within SMEs. Based on the resource-based perspective and dynamic capabilities theory, their study examines intricate relationships between digital technologies, digital platforms, organizational dynamism and firm sustainability. The findings suggest that, overall, digital technologies have a positive effect on sustainability but with an intervening effect from internal organizational dynamics. Organizational dynamism also positively impacts the relationship between digital technologies and sustainability outcomes, requiring a focus on adaptability and adaptive capacity in SME environments. However, digital orientation, as operationalized as a firm’s generic openness to digital technologies, has a counterintuitive negative impact on sustainability if lacking the right internal capacities or fit of strategies. This complexity points toward the need for organizations to transcend superficial digital makeovers and invest in developing an innovation, resilience and lifelong learning culture.

When discussing how prepared maritime professionals are for the digital age, Karahalios (2025) also emphasizes the value of education and learning. New digital skills such as computer programming, statistics and cybersecurity are crucial for safety, productivity and competitiveness as automation and artificial intelligence threaten to transform the maritime sector. However, the research finds massive skills gaps: a mere 37% of MSc students reported receiving previous training in statistics, 16% in cybersecurity and 13% in computer programming. For deck officers, it is even lower at 6%, 9% and 9%, respectively. Based on these findings, the study suggests that digital sustainability courses must be officially incorporated into maritime education programs. The proposed curriculum would be constructed such that it prepares professionals not just to operate in more digital environments but also to shape those environments responsibly and sustainably.

Collectively, Anshari and Ordóñez de Pablos (2025), Abdelwahed et al. (2025) and Karahalios (2025) provide evidence that both organizational and individual skills are needed to facilitate sustainable digital transformation. The idea that technology alone cannot produce sustainability permeates all of the contributions; rather, long-lasting change is produced by the interaction of institutional culture, human potential and strategic purpose. Whether by designing new education programs, heightening firm-level responsiveness or building cross-sectoral abilities, the challenge is to connect workforce development with the needs of the CE and digitalization.

Another insight that emerges is the need for cross-disciplinary thinking. In every instance, success at sustainability is not about environmental awareness or technical capability in isolation. Rather, bringing digital literacy together with leadership, collaboration and strategic thinking is what enables sustainable forward motion. This accords with broader calls for systems of lifelong learning and comprehensive education that break down silos and prepare workers for complex, dynamic systems.

Moreover, organizational preparedness is not a natural aspect; it must be fostered day by day. The SMEs evidence (Abdelwahed et al., 2025) shows that technology-smart companies can fail on their sustainability goals if they lack the internal mechanisms to apply emerging technologies effectively. Similarly, maritime education must transform extremely rapidly (Karahalios, 2025) so that future professionals are not ill-equipped to deal with the dynamics of autonomous and data-based environments. Conversely, Anshari and Ordóñez de Pablos (2025) model provides prescriptive insight into which skills matter most, acting as a roadmap for institutions and organizations navigating the digital sustainability horizon.

Building proficiency in circular and sustainable systems involves a system-wide revolution in how one thinks about education, professional development and organizational transformation. Innovation is at the forefront of technological change in human societies. However, to achieve true sustainability, a deeper cultural shift is required. According to Lobo et al. (2024a), sustainability innovation inherently functions as a social enterprise, necessitating an intensive programmatic transformation that reshapes values, behaviors and institutional norms. Unless social innovation alongside technological innovation is prioritized, balancing progress with long-term development goals, then smarter and more sustainable futures will not be realized. This perspective is upheld by Scalabrino et al. (2022), that introduces the transformative education for sustainable consumption and production framework to accelerate professional education for sustainable development and sustainability. Research helps to underscore the imperative for collective action on the part of educators, business executives and policymakers to prepare people and institutions to possess the tools, knowledge and mindsets for a more sustainable digital economy.

The final cluster of papers in this special issue presents the institutional and structural dimensions of digital sustainability and the potential role that governance, infrastructure and digital platforms can be agents of systemic change. These papers move beyond firm-level innovation or consumer action to examine the broader societal and spatial systems that shape the landscapes of sustainable digital futures.

Munir and Watts (2024) discuss the impact of green practice implementation on business innovation in Pakistan’s chemical industry, a historically underregulated and sustainability-challenged sector. According to reports, organizational size considerably moderates the performance of green practices and smaller businesses may not have the organizational capacity to innovate sustainably without focused assistance. This highlights the need for policy intervention and alignment of resources to enable firms of any size to adopt environmentally driven approaches to innovation.

Chakraborty et al. (2025) provide an integrative model of sustainable city development that brings together urban morphology, design thinking and sustainability principles. Their model seeks to bridge the gap between spatial design and ecological resilience through the emphasis placed on the visualization of socio-geographical elements. Their approach acknowledges that urban sustainability requires coordination between data systems, designers and planners to deliver spaces that are habitable, equitable and green. As a result, the city itself then becomes a backdrop for sustainable innovation.

In the mobility and technology industry, Dias Lousã et al. (2025) conduct a bibliometric analysis of cybersecurity in autonomous vehicles and conclude with key themes, authors and lacking regulation. What their research uncovers is that artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and regulation are now hand in hand with the innovation of autonomous vehicles. These technologies, as great as they are at delivering sustainability benefits in terms of efficiency and emissions savings, also necessitate new governance trends that ensure safety, privacy and ethical standards. This work highlights the simultaneous need for technological advance and regulatory vision.

Izharuddin (2025) refers to the aquaculture industry, a most often overlooked yet increasingly significant sector in the fight against food insecurity and environmental pollution. The study illustrates how digitally enabled innovations such as smart feeding systems and environmental monitoring may result in environmental, economic and social sustainability. These end-to-end innovations make it possible for small-scale fish farmers to reduce waste, increase efficiency and illustrate how digitalization formalizes sustainability for the entire industry. Importantly, this study places aquaculture as a laboratory for inclusive innovation where availability of technology and sustainability consequences go hand in hand.

Larios-Hernandez (2025) analyzes the agency of digital platforms for institutional change. In accordance with the institutional work theory, the study illustrates how platforms shape sustainability agendas via information feedback loops, value signaling and persuasion mechanisms embedded within them. These platforms bring about business processes, supply chains and consumer decisions by embedding sustainability into digital architectures. The study notes that platforms are not merely passive technologies but are active agents capable of catalyzing new norms and practices, making them nodes of governance in the digital transformation. On the same note, Ufua et al. (2021) point out that digital transformation holds enormous promise for progress in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), yet its success relies on stakeholders’ commitment and e-governance performance. The mediator variables of stakeholder commitment and e-governance performance are crucial in the process of translating digital transformation into tangible, inclusive and measurable sustainability outcomes, echoing the essence of collective governance and accountability for digital transformation.

Together, these articles make it evident that true systemic digital sustainability requires more than isolated innovations. It requires aligned cross-cutting governance, facilitative infrastructure and adaptive policy regimes. Whether through urban planning, platform capitalism or sectoral transition, sustainability emerges when technological progress is paired with inclusive institutions and proactive planning. These lessons once more remind us that digital sustainability is a question of governance no less than of technology.

The collection of papers in this special issue illustrates the plurality of digital sustainability and the scale of innovation required to achieve it. Through customer experience, financial innovation, organizational capability and systemic governance, one thread is common: sustainable digital transformation requires integration, collaboration and nimbleness.

Customer experience is no longer peripheral but a primary channel for driving sustainable behavior. Businesses must go beyond efficiency and personalization and create experiences that imbue environmental and social values. Digital engagement platforms, from marketing to AI-driven interfaces, must be sensitive to sustainability narratives to influence consumption habits in a significant manner.

In finance, the disruptive possibilities of technologies such as fintech, RegTech and crowdfunding are obvious. Yet their impact is conditional on regulatory readiness, institutional support and financial literacy. Without these, digital finance may exacerbate inequality and underperformance in emerging markets. In line with this, the infrastructure for digital sustainability must be inclusive and strategically constructed.

Organizational talent development strategies and organizational culture are instrumental to closing both the technological and social dimensions of sustainability. CE skills, digital literacy and adaptability skills are demanded. Higher education and corporate training must change to meet this demand. At a systems level, policy, platforms and design frameworks must facilitate coordination across geographies and sectors.

Digital technologies must go beyond automating existing models and redesign them to facilitate regenerative, equitable and resilient systems. Hence, digital sustainability is not a linear process. It is a dynamic, co-evolutionary process with ongoing learning, institutional alignment and bold innovation.