Regarding the synergetic progression of high-quality development and China’s “dual carbon” objectives, the relationship between new-quality productivity (Npro) and firms’ environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings has become an important issue in corporate sustainability research. A key practical concern is that firms’ technology investment may not necessarily translate into improved ESG rating performance. Using data from Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2011 to 2022, this study develops an integrated framework linking Npro, green innovation (GI), intelligent technology, and rating-based ESG outcomes. Specifically, it examines the parallel mediating roles of green technological innovation (Gt) and green management innovation (Gm), the moderating roles of digital transformation (Dig) and artificial intelligence (AI), and regional heterogeneity across eastern, central, and western China. The findings show that Npro is positively associated with firms’ rating-based ESG outcomes, and this association remains stable across lagged-variable tests, IV-based sensitivity analysis, and multidimensional robustness checks. The results further indicate that Gt and Gm partially mediate the Npro–ESG rating relationship in parallel, with Gm accounting for 85.1% of the total indirect effect. The evidence on intelligent technology suggests that Dig and AI condition parts of the Npro–GI–ESG rating pathway, although their moderating effects are heterogeneous across mechanisms and regions. Regional heterogeneity analysis shows that the association between Npro and ESG ratings follows the order Central > Eastern > Western China. The moderating role of Dig is mainly observed in the Central region, whereas that of AI is mainly observed in the Eastern region. This study contributes to the literature by examining whether firm-level Npro is associated with higher ESG ratings through green technological and green management innovation. It also refines the integrated framework of dual-path green innovation and technology-related boundary conditions. The findings provide practical implications for firms seeking to improve ESG-rating performance through technological upgrading and green management practices, and for governments designing region-specific policies to strengthen the rating-based governance and disclosure channels that support high-quality development and the “dual carbon” agenda.