|
|
|
| The Choice of Government Support Mode to Improve the Basic R&D Capability of Enterprises: The Comparison of Economic/Social Support Policy |
| Zhao Zhen,Xia Qing,Zhang Xuemei,Zhang Yuchun |
| （School of Economics and Management, Lanzhou University of Technology，Lanzhou 730050，China） |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The new economic situation requires the government to further strengthen the public service function so as to promote the improvement of the basic R&D capacity of Chinese enterprises.In order to promote the transformation of the economy from a capital driven model to an innovation driven model, the government has the obligation to promote the improvement of enterprises' basic research through public services on the medium and macro level, graduallymake up for the defect of Chinese enterprises'basic research and development capability, and improve the internal driving force of innovation in China's economy. Studies have shown that innovation behavior is different from the conventional operation of enterprises, and it involves the path dependence of tacit knowledge development and application so that there is high uncertainty, high complexity and path dependence in innovation implementation. Therefore, enterprise innovation shows a variety of characteristics due to individual differences. The innovation phenomenon in the whole industry is diversified, and the individuality is greater than the commonness. This personalized difference is more prominent in basic research and developed areas. In today's industrial economy of innovation and enterprise (in the case of low technology and high density of labor), the traditional undifferentiated government support, i.e. economic policy support can not fully take into account the individual characteristics of enterprise innovation. So a relatively targeted support model of social policy support evolved. However, even when the two support modes are used together, the practical results of local governments are still not ideal. Many problems in practice, such as excessive government intervention, occur from time to time; some enterprises cheat the government to get subsidies. Therefore, this paper tries to explain the mechanism of the two support modes. Starting from the advantages and disadvantages of economic policy and social policy in government support, this paper summarizes the positive and negative effects caused by different support modes, and then tries to form a new logical framework.#br# This paper selects manufacturing enterprises, IT enterprises, pharmaceutical enterprises and chemical enterprises as initial samples for screening and analysis. Based on 498 questionnaires from 158 enterprises, the hierarchical linear model is used to test the hypotheses.The stduy verifies the hypothesis by defining variables and builds a cross-hierarchical regression model.#br# The research has the following findings.（1）The depth of social policy support has an inverted U-shaped effect on the improvement of enterprises' basic R&D capability, but it is easy to provide support beyond the boundary.（2）The normalization of economic policy support has an inverted U-shaped effect on enterprise innovation, but it can significantly reduce the phenomenon of support crossing the boundary. （3）The two modes have their own advantages and disadvantages, and their common use must be based on the industrial development stage, the objective needs of enterprises and the effective participation of the market.#br# Taking the theory of government regulation and the theory of government-market relationship as theoretical clues, this paper is different from previous literature and examines the support situation of enterprise basic R&D in the micro context and takes industrial characteristics as the situational factor to re-examine and test the rationality of the "carrot and stick" view. The research results of this paper provides guiding significancefor government. Firstly, the supportive policies and measures in social support should abide by the supportive boundary. There are certain constraints on the public service function of the government. In order to ensure the play of market mechanism, the local government should not intervene excessively in planning and promoting enterprise innovation. Secondly, an information disclosure mechanism combining enterprise, market and government has been formed, which slows down the rigidity of economic policy support. In the implementation process of economic policy support in the future,theinformation disclosure platform should be established to reflect enterprise demand and market conditions. Finally, according to the industry characteristics, the government should improve the dynamic and pluralistic role of policy support, and be able to choose the appropriate support mode dynamically and diversely to prevent the occurrence of support disutility.#br#
|
|
Received: 05 July 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] YUAN B, ZHANG Y. Flexible environmental policy, technological innovation and sustainable development of China's industry: the moderating effect of environment regulatory enforcement[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 243(10):1-17.[2] COAD A, SEGARRA-BLASCO A, TERUEL M. A bit of basic, a bit of applied:R&D strategies and firm performance[J]. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2020,15(6):1-26.[3] BAE S J, LEE H. The role of government in fostering collaborative R&D projects: empirical evidence from South Korea[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2020, 14(5):151-165.[4] CHU A C, FURUKAWA Y. Patentability and knowledge spillovers of basic R&D[J]. Southern Economic Journal, 2013, 79(4):928-945.[5] COAD A, AGUSTI SEGARRA-BLASCO, TERUEL M. A bit of basic, a bit of applied:R&D strategies and firm performance[J]. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2020,17(6):1-26.[6] FIRTH M, GONG S X, SHAN L. Cost of government and firm value[J]. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2013, 21(2):136-152.[7] DU J, LU Y, TAO Z. Government expropriation and Chinese-style firm diversification[J]. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2015,18(43):155-169.[8] AISBETT E,MCAUSLAND C.Firm characteristics and influence on government rule-making: theory and evidence[J]. European Journal of Political Economy, 2013, 29:214-235.[9] CHOW-MENG CHEN, MOHAMED ARIFF, TUAFIQ HASSAN, et al. Does a firm's political connection to government have economic value[J]. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 2013, 18(3):477-501.[10] AOKI R , KAO T . Protection of basic research and R&D incentives in an international setting[M]. Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, 2012.[11] TRAN N M, NONNEMAN W, JORISSEN A. Government ownership and firm performance: the case of Vietnam[J]. International Journal of Economics & Financial Issues, 2014, 33(7):625-627.[12] YU W, ZHENG Y. Government regulation, corporate board, and firm value: evidence from China[J]. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 2014, 25(2):182-208.[13] JIA Y X, GUO H L. The principal-agent game analysis among accounting firm, enterprise customer and government[C]// Service Systems and Service Management (ICSSSM), 2013.[14] FERRAZ C, FINAN F, SZERMAN D. Procuring firm growth: the effects of government purchases on firm dynamics[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2015,16(4):17-30.[15] 金太军, 袁建军. 政府与企业的交换模式及其演变规律——观察腐败深层机制的微观视角[J]. 中国社会科学, 2011,32(5):102-118.[16] LOULAKIS M C,MCLAUGHLIN L P.Government sues A/E firm for cost escalation caused by late delivery of design package[J]. Civil Engineering, 2014, 82(3):92-112.[17] JUSTIN J P,VERA J D,CROSSAN M. Strategic leadership for exploration and exploitation: the moderating role of environmental dynamism[J].The Leadership Quarterly,2009,19(20):30-45. [18] HOFMANN D A, GAVIN M B. Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: implications for research in organizations[J]. Journal of Management, 1998, 24(5):623-641.[19] 邵敏, 包群. 政府补贴与企业生产率——基于我国工业企业的经验分析[J]. 中国工业经济, 2012,30(6):70-82. |
|
|
|
