The fourth generation industrial revolution represented by intelligence, as a new economic form, provides a feasible path for achieving economic growth, optimizing the ecological environment and improving residents' income.  The conclusion shows that industrial intelligence promotes inclusive green growth on the whole, and after robustness test, endogeneity test, heterogeneity test and causal regression analysis, the result is still significant, which indicates that the benchmark regression results in this paper have strong robustness. Causal identification shows that the "Made in China 2025" policy has promoted the improvement of industrial intelligence to a certain extent, and the use of differential model research shows that industrial intelligence can promote the improvement of inclusive green growth, and a series of robustness tests are conducted to demonstrate that the conclusion is reasonable and reliable.

Xin Wang, Jian Guo. Research on the Impact of Industrial Intelligence on Inclusive Green Growth. International Journal of Social Sciences and Economic Management (2023), Vol. 4, Issue 1: 71-83. https://doi.org/10.38007/IJSSEM.2023.040108.

[1] Graetz G, Michaels G. Robots at work. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2018, 100(5): 753-768.

[2] Acemoglu D, Restrepo P. Artificial intelligence, automation and work[R]. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018.

[3] Kromann L, Malchow-Møller N, Skaksen J R, et al. Automation and productivity—a cross-country, cross-industry comparison. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2020, 29(2): 265-287.

[4] Roach S S. America's technology dilemma: A profile of the information economy[M]. Morgan Stanley, 1987.

[5] Solow R. We’d better watch out, review of SS Cohen and J. Zysman, Manufacturing matters: The myth of the post-industrial economy. New York Times Book Review, 1987, 36: 37.

[6] Brynjolfsson E. The productivity paradox of information technology. Communications of the ACM, 1993, 36(12): 66-77.

[7] Kettinger W J, Grover V, Guha S, et al. Strategic information systems revisited: a study in sustainability and performance. MIS quarterly, 1994: 31-58.

[8] Carr N G. IT doesn't matter. Educause Review, 2003, 38: 24-38.

[9] Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L. Paradox lost? Firm-level evidence on the returns to information systems spending. Management science, 1996, 42(4): 541-558.

[10] Dewan S, Kraemer K L. Information technology and productivity: evidence from country-level data. Management science, 2000, 46(4): 548-562.

[11] Lin W T, Shao B B M. The business value of information technology and inputs substitution: the productivity paradox revisited. Decision support systems, 2006, 42(2): 493-507.

[12] Chen Y H, Lin W T. Analyzing the relationships between information technology, inputs substitution and national characteristics based on CES stochastic frontier production models. International Journal of Production Economics, 2009, 120(2): 552-569.

[13] Shuming R,Lianqing L,Yueqi H, et al. The emerging driving force of inclusive green growth: Does digital economy agglomeration work?. Business Strategy and the Environment,2022,31(4).

[14] Barro R. J. , Sala-i-Martin X. Economic growth [M]. MIT Press, 2004

[15] Klump R, McAdam P, Willman A. Factor substitution and factor-augmenting technical progress in the United States: a normalized supply-side system approach. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 2007, 89(1): 183-192.

[16] León-Ledesma M A, McAdam P, Willman A. Identifying the elasticity of substitution with biased technical change. American Economic Review, 2010, 100(4): 1330-57.

[17] León-Ledesma M A, McAdam P, Willman A. Production technology estimates and balanced growth. oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2015, 77(1): 40-65.

[18] Yajie L,Lijuan C,Yanyan X, et al. Does the development of the Internet improve the allocative efficiency of production factors? Evidence from surveys of Chinese manufacturing firms. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics,2023,66.

[19] Nunn N, Qian N. US food aid and civil conflict. American Economic Review, 2014, 104(6): 1630-66.