Transformational Leadership and Green Transportation Participation Behavior: Parallel Mediation Through Digital Transformation and Sustainability Awareness and the Contingent Role of Government Support

Transport decarbonization depends not only on infrastructure and technology but also on individuals’ sustained adoption of lower-carbon mobility. Drawing on transformational leadership theory (Bass & Avolio, 1994), the resource-based view (Barney, 1991), dynamic capability theory (Teece, 2007), and the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991), this study examines how transformational leadership influences green transportation participation behavior through digital transformation and sustainability awareness. Survey data from 512 employees and managers in Vietnam were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling with 5,000 bootstrap resamples (Hair et al., 2022). Transformational leadership positively affected digital transformation (β = 0.709), sustainability awareness (β = 0.613), and green transportation participation behavior (β = 0.290). Digital transformation (β = 0.205) and sustainability awareness (β = 0.307) also significantly increased participation behavior. Both indirect effects were significant through digital transformation (β = 0.145) and sustainability awareness (β = 0.188). The model explained 48.6% of the variance in green transportation participation behavior. Government support had a small positive direct effect (β = 0.106), whereas its moderating effects were nonsignificant. These findings demonstrate that transformational leadership promotes sustainable mobility through complementary capability-building and cognitive pathways, while government support appears to operate as an independent institutional condition rather than strengthening these relationships.

transformational leadership; digital transformation; sustainability awareness; green transportation participation behavior; government support; sustainable mobility.

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alabdali, M. A., Yaqub, M. Z., Agarwal, R., Alofaysan, H., & Mohapatra, A. K. (2024). Unveiling green digital transformational leadership: Nexus between green digital culture, green digital mindset, and green digital transformation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 450, 141670. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141670 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations (Vol. 25). Free press New York. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930250310 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership and followership (Vol. 18). Harper & Row. https://faculty.washington.edu/rsoder/Honors%20AS261/1and2.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cohen, J. ( 1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). . Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Gong, C., & Ribiere, V. (2021). Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation, 102, 102217. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Guo, Q., Yao, N., Ouyang, Z., & Wang, Y. (2023). Digital development and innovation for environmental sustainability: The role of government support and government intervention. Sustainable Development, 32, 3389-3404. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2854 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. He, Y., Sun, Y., Zhao, Z., Chen, M., Waygood, E. O. D., & Shu, Y. (2024). Impact of social-psychological factors on low-carbon travel intention: Merging theory of planned behavior and value-belief-norm theory. Heliyon, 10(6), e28161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28161 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. IEA, I. E. A. (2025). Breakthrough agenda report 2025. . https://doi.org/https://www.iea.org/reports/breakthrough-agenda-report-2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. IEA, I. E. A. (2026). Global energy review 2026. https://doi.org/https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2026 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Le, T. T., Chau, T. L. Q., Ngoc, L. T. T., & Tieu, T. T. (2024). How green transformational leadership drives environmental performance and firm performance? Empirical evidence from an emerging economy. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(6), 5504-5523. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2872 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Nitzl, C., Roldán, J., & Cepeda-Carrion, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116, 1849-1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88, 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ren, Q., Li, T., & Mavros, C. (2024). Transformational Leadership and Sustainable Practices: How Leadership Style Shapes Employee Pro-Environmental Behavior. Sustainability, 16, 6499. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156499 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & & Becker, J.-M. (2024). SmartPLS 4. In [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Robertson, J., & Barling, J. (2013). Greening Organizations Through Leaders' Influence on Employees' Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Journal of organizational behavior, 34. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1820 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Scott, W. (2014). Institutions and Organizations. Ideas, Interests and Identities. . SAGE Open, 17, 136. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.172.0136 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Teece, D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28, 1319-1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Qi Dong, J., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of business research, 122, 889-901. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The journal of strategic information systems, 28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Vietnam, P. M. o. (2022). Decision No. 876/QD-TTg approving the action program on green energy transition and reduction of carbon and methane emissions in the transport sector. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Waqas, M., Dong, Q.-l., Ahmad, N., Yuming, Z., & Nadeem, M. (2018). Understanding Acceptability towards Sustainable Transportation Behavior, A Case Study of China. Sustainability, 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103686 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Zhang, L., Tao, L., Yang, F., Bao, Y., & Li, C. (2024). Promoting green transportation through changing behaviors with low-carbon-travel function of digital maps. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 298. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02737-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study