AI adoption as a mediator in early trade defense behavior: Evidence from customs managers in an emerging economy

  • 23 Views
  • 1 Downloads

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
This study aims to examine the factors influencing early warning behavior in trade defense through the mediating role of the decision to adopt artificial intelligence (AI). Data were collected in the first quarter of 2025 from a survey of 328 managers working in the customs sector in Vietnam. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), the findings reveal that the decision to adopt AI is directly influenced by six factors: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived risk, organizational commitment to innovation, technological readiness, and external pressure. These six factors also exert indirect effects on early warning behavior through the mediating role of AI adoption decisions. In contrast, organizational support does not generate a statistically significant moderating effect on the relationship between AI adoption and early warning behavior. The results provide further evidence of the critical role of AI adoption in enhancing effectiveness and efficiency within customs authorities, particularly in strengthening behaviors that safeguard the interests of exporting firms and protect national interests. These findings offer practical implications for emerging economies with conditions similar to Vietnam, where leveraging AI can serve as a strategic tool to improve trade defense mechanisms.

Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the Editor-in-Chief and a reviewer for their helpful comments that in our view have helped to improve the quality of the manuscript significantly. Besides, this study is the result of collaboration between researchers from the University of Law, Hue University, and School of Business and Economics, Duy Tan University. The authors would like to thank both institutions for their support and facilitation in the publication of this research.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Figure 1. Model and hypotheses
    • Figure 2. Linear structural model
    • Table 1. Demographics of participants
    • Table 2. Descriptive statistics, construct reliability, and validity
    • Table 3. Discriminant reliability
    • Table 4. Structural model evaluation
    • Table 5. Hypotheses testing
    • Table A1. Measurement scales
    • Conceptualization
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Data curation
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Formal Analysis
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Investigation
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Methodology
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Project administration
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Resources
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Software
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Supervision
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Validation
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Visualization
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Writing – original draft
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh
    • Writing – review & editing
      Long Tran Viet, Hai Phan Thanh