|
|
|
| The Influence of Institutional Gap on International Technology Transfer：An Analysis Based on Panel Data from 2009 to 2019 |
| Chen Huaichao,He Zhimin,Fan Jianhong |
| (College of Economics and Management, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract At present, China's economy has progressed from the high-speed growth stage to the high-quality development stage. It has become vital for accelerating the transformation of economic development mode and improving the economic development quality by promoting scientific and technological development. Generally speaking, technological development level of a country not only depends on the internal technological accumulation, but also needs to obtain advanced technology from abroad. However, the technology has the characteristic of situational embeddedness, and the effective technology transfer depends on the specific situation. Because the technology transferor and recipient are in different institutional environments, institutional distance will inevitably influence international technology transfer. Therefore, it has become an urgent practical problem to clarify the relationship between institutional distance and international technology transfer.#br#The existing literature discusses the influence factors of international technology transfer from different perspectives, but there is a lack of empirical research from the perspective of institutional distance. In addition, institutional distance is not only different in size, but also in direction. On the basis of incorporating the direction attribute into institutional distance to form institutional gap, it is necessary to further explore the impact of the institutional gap on international technology transfer and the innovation capacity of technology exporting countries. In view of this, the paper uses the panel data of China’s technology introduction from 2009 to 2019 to carry out empirical research from the perspective of technology recipient. The paper divides institutional gap into institutional deficit and institutional surplus, explores their influences on international technology transfer respectively, and examines the moderation effect of innovation capability of technology export country.#br#It is concluded that firstly the influences of institutional deficit and institutional surplus on international technology transfer show directional difference, and there is no dimensional difference. Specifically, both regulative deficit and normative deficit are conducive to international technology transfer, that is, the larger the institutional deficit, the easier the international technology transfer is; both regulative surplus and normative surplus are not conducive to international technology transfer. Secondly, innovation capability of technology export country can enhance the promotion effect of normative deficit on international technology transfer, and weaken the hindrance effect of regulative surplus and normative surplus, but the moderation effect of innovation capability of technology export country in the influence of regulative deficit on international technology transfer is not significant.#br#The results of this paper confirm that institutional gaps in different directions have different influences on international technology transfer, and improve the research on the antecedents of international technology transfer in institutional difference. At the same time, they verify the moderation effect of innovation capability of technology export country as a situational factor, reflect the differential influences of the matching between institutional gaps in different dimensions and innovation capability of technology export country on international technology transfer, and deepen the research in relevant fields.#br#This paper puts forward the following policy suggestions. Firstly, relevant departments should distinguish the influences of different institutional gaps and promote international technology transfer. In the case of institutional deficit, relevant departments should guide enterprises to actively conduct self-examination, and timely adjust their own conduct codes on the basis of fully learning and being familiar with the institution of technology export country, so as to ensure the smooth progress of international technology transfer. At the same time, they should guide enterprises to strengthen the communication and exchange with enterprises of technology export country, timely obtain the advanced technology of technology export country, and realize the leverage development. In the case of institutional surplus, relevant departments should actively guide enterprises to fully understand the institutional environment of technology export country, make use of their own institutional advantages, change strategies in time, establish stable cooperative relationship combining with past experience, avoid the risk and cost of technology transfer caused by institutional gap, and steadily promote international technology transfer. Secondly, relevant departments should pay attention to innovation capability of technology export country and promote technology introduction combining with different institutional gaps. On the one hand, they should improve the comprehensive evaluation system of innovation capability of technology export country, provide accurate evaluation data for enterprises in time, and guide enterprises to pay attention to cutting-edge technologies in relevant fields. On the other hand, they should take a variety of measures according to local condition to improve the success rate of international technology transfer combining with the institutional gap.#br#
|
|
Received: 06 September 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] SIKDAR C, MUKHOPADHYAY K. Technology transfer and productivity growth:evidence from Indian manufacturing industries[J]. The Journal of Developing Areas, 2020, 54(4): 17-32.[2] 范建亭, 汪立. 出口导向、技术类型与跨国公司内部技术转移——基于在华日资企业的实证分析[J]. 财经研究, 2015,41(10): 83-95.[3] CHANG S H. The technology networks and development trends of university-industry collaborative patents[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2017, 118(5): 107-113.[4] 秦德智, 秦超, 赵德森. 组织交互渠道、关系质量及学习意愿对中国—东盟跨国公司技术转移绩效的影响[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2018，35(2): 53-58.[5] CARINA A, AURORA T. Determinants of international technology transfer: an empirical analysis of the enterprise Europe network[J]. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 2014, 9(3): 120-134.[6] 司月芳, 王岱, 王丰龙. 对华跨境技术转移影响因素研究[J]. 地理科学, 2019, 39(2): 259-266.[7] DUC NGUYEN N T, TAKANASHI C, AOYAMA A. Can efficient technology transfer be achieved through a hybrid corporate culture? a study on Japanese manufacturing subsidiaries in Vietnam[J]. International Journal of Business and Management, 2012, 7(7): 24-39.[8] 王姣娥, 杜方叶, 刘卫东. 制度与文化对嵌入式技术海外转移的影响——以蒙内铁路为例[J]. 地理学报, 2020, 75(6): 1147-1158.[9] 李康宏, 林润辉, 宋泾溧, 等. 制度落差与中国跨国企业海外进入模式关系研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2017, 26(12): 189-199.[10] 陈武, 常燕. 跨国技术转移和扩散对国家创新能力的作用机理及相关关系——来自中国的经验证据[J]. 科技管理研究, 2015, 35(1): 6-11.[11] SCOTT W R. Institutions and organizations[M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995.[12] KOSTOVA T. Success of the transnational transfer of organizational practices within multinational companies[D]. Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 1996.[13] XU D. The effect of institutional distance on multinational enterprise strategy[D]. Ontario: York University, 2001.[14] TR?PCZY?SKI P, HALASZOVICH T F, PIASKOWSKA D. The role of perceived institutional distance in foreign ownership level decisions of new MNEs[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2020, 108: 435-449.[15] XU D, PAN Y, BEAMISH P W. The effect of regulative and normative distances on MNE ownership and expatriate strategies[J]. Management International Review, 2004, 44(3): 285-307.[16] ZHANG H R. Institutional distance, investment motivation and OFDI location-taking the countries along the "Belt and Road" as an example[J]. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2019, 7(2): 118-131.[17] KEIG D L, BROUTHERS L E, MARSHALL V B. The impact of formal and informal institutional distances on MNE corporate social performance[J]. International Business Review, 2019, 28(5): 101584.[18] 耿晔强, 都帅帅. 制度环境、技术创新与企业加成率——基于动态竞争视角的微观研究[J]. 经济问题, 2020,42(10): 62-71.[19] 韩安民. 制度环境是否提高了出口技术复杂度——来自29个国家的证据[J]. 国际经济合作, 2021,37(2): 29-40.[20] 刘和旺, 郑世林. 地区制度质量如何影响技术创新: 一个实证研究[J]. 湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2014, 41(2): 104-110.[21] 黄丽, 林诗琦, 陈静. 中国区域创新能力与能源利用效率的时空耦合协调分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2020, 29(6): 1161-1171.[22] 许士道, 江静. 创业活力、创新能力与城市经济发展效率——基于283个地级市数据的实证检验[J]. 山西财经大学学报, 2021, 43(3): 1-13.[23] 刘跃, 卜曲, 彭春香. 中国区域技术创新能力与经济增长质量的关系[J]. 地域研究与开发, 2016, 35(3): 1-4, 39.[24] CHAO M C H, KUMAR V. The impact of institutional distance on the international diversity performance relationship[J]. Journal of World Business, 2010, 45(1): 93-103.[25] 陈怀超, 范建红. 制度距离构成维度的厘定和量表开发[J]. 管理评论, 2014, 26(9): 69-77, 159.[26] 张微, 卜伟. “一带一路”下中国企业“走出去”投资模式研究——基于政治、文化和制度距离[J]. 投资研究, 2019, 38(9): 146-156.[27] 宋渊洋, 黄礼伟. 为什么中国企业难以国内跨地区经营[J]. 管理世界, 2014(12): 115-133.[28] RAMZI T, SALAH A B. The determinants of innovation capacity in the less innovative countries in the Euro-Mediterranean region[J]. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 2018, 9(2): 526-543.[29] 任静, 宋敏. 跨国公司研发对我国农业技术创新影响的实证分析[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2012, 29(4): 23-26.[30] 张慧敏, 刘洪钟. 政治距离、文化差异与中国的对外贸易[J]. 国际经贸探索, 2020, 36(1): 33-52.[31] 汪涛, 贾煜, 崔朋朋, 等. 外交关系如何影响跨国企业海外市场绩效[J]. 中国工业经济, 2020,37(7): 80-97.[32] 李俊久, 丘俭裕, 何彬. 文化距离、制度距离与对外直接投资——基于对“一带一路”沿线国家OFDI的实证研究[J]. 武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2020, 73(1): 120-134.[33] 姜宝, 邢晓丹, 李剑. “走出去”战略下中国对欧盟逆向投资的贸易效应研究——基于FGLS和PCSE修正的面板数据模型[J]. 国际贸易问题, 2015,41(9): 167-176.[34] KOGUT B, SINGH H. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 1988, 19(3): 411-432. [35] 乔翠霞. 国际技术转移的新变化及对中国的启示[J]. 理论学刊, 2015,32(6): 48-54.[36] 罗鹏, 钱永坤. 企业战略、东道国市场、制度与跨国公司在华技术转移——基于日本在华企业的问卷调查[J]. 经济管理, 2009, 31(5): 72-79. |
|
|
|
