|
|
|
| Evaluation of the Dominant Position of Enterprise Innovation with Different Ownerships：Based on the Dual Perspective of Scale and Efficiency |
| Zhou Zhong,Wang Ting,Lu Haibo |
| （School of Economic and Management, Shanghai Institute of Technology, Shanghai 201418, China） |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the deepening of reform and opening up and China's economic development entering the new normal, it's an urgent requirement for national transformation and upgrading to promote enterprises to become the main body of innovation decision-making, R&D investment, research organization and application of R&D achievements. It is also the key to the implementation of innovation-driven development strategy.#br#At present, the proportion of R&D investment by enterprises in total R&D investment of the whole society is constantly increasing. Relying on different forms such as key laboratories, platforms for collaborative innovation among universities, scientific research institutes and enterprises have been established. The technological innovation system of deep integration of Industry-Academia-Research has also been continuously improved. However, has the innovation dominant position of enterprises been formed? To what extent do enterprises play the role? The existing research mainly focuses on its conceptual connotation, analytical framework and evaluation system, and there is not a unified understanding on the innovation dominant position of enterprises, and there are also mixed use of multiple index scales. In addition, the quality of the innovation dominant position of enterprises has not been fully concerned and studied.#br#Based on the analysis of innovation value chain, this paper divides the innovation process into R&D investment, R&D investment, research organization and application of R&D achievements. Index system and evaluation method of the innovation dominant position of enterprise are proposed from the perspective of scale. By distinguishing domestic-funded, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan-funded and foreign-funded enterprise, this paper evaluated the innovation dominant position of enterprises with different ownership properties. On this basis, from the perspective of innovation efficiency, this paper used BCC-DEA model and DEA Malmquist index to further study the quality of innovation dominant position of enterprises with different ownership properties from both static and dynamic aspect. It further analyzed the ways to improve efficiency of regional scientific and technological innovation, and explored the optimal allocation of scientific and technological resources.#br#The empirical results of Shanghai show that, from the perspective of scale, the dominant position of Shanghai enterprises in R&D investment is relatively obvious. However, it shows a weakening trend, especially the proportion of R&D funds decreases significantly. The proportion of R&D funds provided by enterprises to universities and scientific research institutes also declines. At the output end mainly represented by invention patents and scientific papers, the innovation dominant position of enterprise is not obvious, and there are signs of decline. But the transformation of scientific and technological achievements of enterprises is more active. On the other hand, from the perspective of innovation efficiency, the innovation efficiency of foreign-funded enterprises in Shanghai is the best in a single year, which is the benchmark among the three types of enterprises with different ownership. The reason for the low innovation efficiency of domestic-funded enterprises lies in the poor allocation of resources and the decreasing return on scale of technological innovation. The innovation efficiency of Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan-funded enterprises has a decreasing trend, but the return to scale has increased in recent years. Among domestic-funded enterprises, the innovation efficiency of state-owned enterprises and companies with limited liability is better. The return to scale of companies limited by shares decreases, while other enterprises increases. From the dynamic changes of consecutive years, only domestic-funded enterprises maintain an average annual slight growth of total factor productivity of scientific and technological innovation. This is mainly due to its growth of technical efficiency. The decline in technical efficiency of foreign-funded and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan-funded enterprises has led to an average annual decline in total factor productivity, resulting in ups and downs and decline in the overall innovation efficiency.#br#According to the research results, it is suggested that Shanghai promote domestic-funded enterprises to strengthen the allocation of scientific and technological resources. Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan-funded enterprises are encouraged to increase investment in scientific and technological resources and improve their innovation efficiency. At the same time, we suggest that the Shanghai municipal government guide foreign-funded companies to further play the role of global resource allocation by establishing Asia Pacific headquarters, global headquarters and global R&D center in Shanghai. In addition, it is also suggested to further tap the scientific and technological achievements of Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan-funded enterprises and domestic-funded enterprises. The professional technology transfer ability of these enterprises should be cultivated. Through incentive policies, the government should guide foreign R&D centers to strengthen the local transformation and application of their R&D achievements.#br#
|
|
Received: 17 May 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 张赤东. 中国企业技术创新主体地位监测分析(2000-2012年)[J]. 科研管理,2015,36(11):71-79.[2] 鲁涛,马明. 江苏企业技术创新主体地位测度指数研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2017,34(21):37-43.[3] 孙玉涛,刘凤朝. 中国企业技术创新主体地位确立:情境、内涵和政策[J]. 科学学研究,2016,34(11):1716-1724.[4] 周钟,熊焰,张林刚. 内蒙古企业创新主体地位评价[J]. 科学管理研究,2019,37(2):84-88.[5] 张彦红,钟君. 基于EKV评价框架的企业技术创新主体地位研究:以贵州省为例[J]. 科技管理研究,2021,41(1):37-42.[6] 李影,张鹏,曾永泉. 粤港澳大湾区工业科技创新效率及其时空演变研究[J]. 工业技术经济,2020,39(8):21-27.[7] 齐亚伟. 区域创新环境对三大创新主体创新效率的影响比较研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2015,32(14):41-46.[8] 赵增耀,章小波,沈能. 区域协同创新效率的多维溢出效应[J]. 中国工业经济,2015,32(1):32-44.[9] 肖仁桥,王宗军,钱丽. 技术差距视角下我国不同性质企业创新效率研究[J]. 数量经济技术经济研究,2015,32(10):38-55.[10] 刘兰剑,史盼. 基于所有制性质的高技术企业创新能力差异及生成机理:源自省级面板数据的实证研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2020,37(23):100-107.[11] 刘和旺,郑世林,王宇锋. 所有制类型、技术创新与企业绩效[J]. 中国软科学,2015,30(3):28-40.[12] LIN C,LIN P,SONG F. Property rights protection and corporate R&D:evidence from China[J]. Journal of Development Economics,2010,93(1):49-62.[13] SCHWARTZ M,PEGLOW F,FRITSCH M,et al. What drives innovation output from subsidized R&D cooperation: project-level evidence from Germany[J]. Technovation,2012,32(6):358-369.[14] 池仁勇,於珺,阮鸿鹏. 企业规模、研发投入对创新绩效的影响研究:基于信用环境与知识存量视角[J]. 华东经济管理,2020,34(9):43-54.[15] 郑春美,李佩. 政府补助与税收优惠对企业创新绩效的影响:基于创业板高新技术企业的实证研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2015,32(16):83-87.[16] LIN B Q,LUAN R R. Do government subsidies promote efficiency in technological innovation of China's photovoltaic enterprises[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2020,254:120108.[17] 孙振清,李欢欢,刘保留. 中国东部沿海四大城市群协同创新效率综合测度及影响因素研究[J]. 科技进步与对策,2021,38(2):47-55.[18] ROPER S,DU J,LOVE J H. Modelling the innovation value chain[J]. Research Policy,2008,37(6-7):961-977.[19] 王伟光,张钟元,侯军利. 创新价值链及其结构:一个理论框架[J]. 科技进步与对策,2019,36(1):36-43. |
|
|
|
