Landscape ecology is vital and significantly contributes to the country's social and economic growth. This concept is directly linked with sustainable development goals, and a growing potential exists that landscape ecology will replace conventional landscaping practices as the authoritative framework for environmentally responsible landscaping. Decentralizing spatial planning policy requires local actors to work together to determine what physical changes must be made to the environment to reflect their respective values. To be applicable in such bottom‐up landscape‐development processes, this study checks the relationship between the landscape ecological perspective and the financial development of China over the period 1995–2021 by using the autoregressive distributed lag model. The findings indicated that green investment, environmental pressure and energy consumption play a significant role in China's financial development. Landscape ecological research should pay more attention to these dilemmas as a unifying common ground to produce a joint knowledge base that can be incorporated into multifunctional, actor‐led landscape development. This research adds value to the modern pattern‐process model in landscape ecology by developing this idea into a knowledgeable framework. Subsequently, this study promotes green investment activities and consumption of energy sources so that landscape ecology aims should be obtained through interdisciplinary research. Future research can be done by taking the emerging economies into account.

Innovation is crucial for firms’ sustainable development. However, the original motivation of innovation in China is insufficient and the key technology is controlled by other countries. Outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) is an important strategic choice in emerging economies to seek overseas advantageous technical knowledge and to participate in global competition. With the further development of China’s “go global” strategy, OFDI flows have risen considerably. Whether OFDI can promote firms’ innovation levels and whether OFDI entry modes (greenfield investment and cross-border M&A) have the same impact are still major issues to be solved. Therefore, we constructed a mathematical model and adopted the propensity score matching double difference method to analyze the impact and mechanism of OFDI on firms’ innovation. The results show that OFDI has a significant effect on innovation quantity, quality, and efficiency, and it has not led to innovative strategic behavior. Further research shows that cross-border M&A has a stronger effect on innovation quality than greenfield investment, and both have a sustainable innovation effect. Over time, the gap between the impact of greenfield investment and cross-border M&A on innovation quality has gradually narrowed. From the perspective of mechanism, the two entry modes of OFDI are beneficial to firms’ access to government resources and to promote innovation quality, while government resources have a stronger mediating effect on cross-border M&A firms. This paper deepens the research on the influence mechanism of OFDI entry modes on firms’ innovation levels, while also providing theoretical and practical support for the selection of OFDI modes and innovation strategies for firms.

Entrepreneurship is regarded as the cornerstone of the sustainable development of a society. In this study, we empirically investigate the possible economic impacts of capital account liberalization on entrepreneurship. Using a panel dataset of 103 countries and regions and the system generalized method of moments (GMM), this paper demonstrates a positive relationship between capital account liberalization and entrepreneurship in developed economies whereas a negative relationship in developing economies. Furthermore, domestic financial development plays an important moderating role in the relationship between capital account openness and entrepreneurship. Specifically, the negative impact of capital account liberalization in developing economies is mitigated by a high degree of domestic credit and equity market development, the continuous deepening of finance and better financial inclusion. Our findings imply that domestic financial development is an essential prerequisite for the opening of a country’s capital account, especially for developing countries.