Nowadays, the government and new energy vehicle companies have gradually increased their investment in innovative resources for new energy vehicles to increase the innovation output of new energy vehicles. But what follows is the problem of diminishing marginal output of new energy vehicle innovation, and the traditional model of "high input and high output" may no longer be applicable. Correspondingly, the inherent law of diminishing marginal output of corporate innovation and increasing marginal cost of corporate innovation input may inhibit the innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle companies. Most of the present studies carry out in-depth and detailed research from the aspects of innovation stage division and DEA model improvement, ignoring the actual impact of environmental factors on the innovation efficiency of new energy enterprises.#br#This paper selects 187 new energy vehicle listed companies as research samples to make an empirical analysis. First, regional openness, labor quality, technical market environment, technical foundation, and environmental regulation are selected as environmental factors, and the three-stage DEA method is used to measure the influence of environmental factors and the innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises; second, equity concentration, enterprise patent stock, employee quality, government subsidy intensity, enterprise-scale, financing structure, number of R&D personnel, and R&D personnel are selected based on the measured innovation efficiency value of new energy vehicle enterprises. By taking the expenditure as an explanatory variable, the Tobit model is used to study the influencing factors of the selected variables on the innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises.#br#The results show that the innovation efficiency, pure technical efficiency and scale efficiency of 187 new energy companies are 0.14, 0.26, and 0.59 respectively, indicating that the overall innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle companies is not high. Pure technical efficiency may be the main factor responsible for this phenomenon. Without removing environmental factors and random errors, the innovation efficiency of listed new energy vehicle companies presents an inverted N shape, with the average value fluctuating around 0.15, the average pure technical efficiency fluctuating around 0.25, and the average scale efficiency fluctuates about 0.6, and the low pure technical efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises is the main reason for the low innovation efficiency, indicating that new energy vehicle enterprises have much room for improvement in internal management. After excluding the impact of environmental factors on innovation efficiency, the innovation efficiency of listed new energy vehicle companies is generally stable, and the development trend has changed, showing an N-shaped development, indicating that environmental factors have had a substantial impact on measuring the innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle companies. It is necessary to use the three-stage DEA model to measure innovation efficiency after eliminating the influence of environmental factors. From a specific analysis, the innovation efficiency and scale efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises are at a low level, and the pure technical efficiency is at a high level of 0.9. Therefore, it is analyzed that the reason for the low innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises is no longer pure technical efficiency, and the low scale efficiency has become the key factor restricting the low innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises.#br#The Tobit model is used to study the influencing factors of the selected variables on the innovation efficiency of new energy vehicle enterprises. The results show that the characteristics of enterprises themselves have different degrees of influence on innovation efficiency. R&D expenditures promote innovation efficiency but are not statistically significant, and R&D personnel is positively correlated with innovation efficiency at the 1% level. At the level of 1%, ownership concentration has a significant role in promoting the innovation efficiency of enterprises. Enterprise patent stock at the level of 1% promotes the improvement of enterprise innovation efficiency. At the 1% level, there is a positive relationship between enterprise-scale and enterprise innovation efficiency. Both the government subsidy intensity and the financing structure have a negative impact on the innovation efficiency of enterprises at the level of 10%.#br#Compared with previous studies,this study considers the impact of environmental factors of new energy vehicle companies on innovation efficiency, instead of using traditional DEA methods and stochastic frontier analysis methods to calculate innovation of new energy vehicle companies. Second, based on the existing research foundation of new energy vehicle enterprises, the study selects the commonly used factors affecting enterprise innovation efficiencies, such as ownership structure, government subsidies and employee quality, and further explore the influencing factors of enterprise innovation efficiency excluding environmental factors.#br#
[1] 白俊红, 江可申, 李婧. 应用随机前沿模型评测中国区域研发创新效率[J]. 管理世界, 2009,25(10): 51-61.
[2] 陈德球, 金雅玲, 董志勇. 政策不确定性、政治关联与企业创新效率[J]. 南开管理评论, 2016,19(4): 27-35.
[3] 陈克兢, 万清清, 康艳玲. 国家治理体系与国有企业创新效率——基于巡视监督的准自然实验[J]. 科研管理, 2020,41(8): 211-219.
[4] HE Y, GAN S, XIAO L. Can foreign suppliers act as “innovation springboards” for firms? evidence from China[J]. Research in International Business and Finance, 2021,56: 101353.
[5] 解学梅, 王宏伟, 唐海燕. 创新生态战略与创新效率关系:基于创新生态网络视角[J]. 系统管理学报, 2020,29(6): 1065-1077.
[6] 王延霖, 郭晓川. 资源型上市公司高管团队激励方式对企业创新效率的影响研究——基于创新价值链和产权性质的考量[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2020,32(4): 149-161.
[7] 姜军, 江轩宇, 伊志宏. 企业创新效率研究——来自股权质押的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2020,63(2): 128-146.
[8] HIRSHLEIFER D, HSU P, LI D. Innovative efficiency and stock returns[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2013,107(3): 632-654.
[9] LI H, PANG S, CAO Y, et al. Research on the evaluation of comprehensive efficiency of technological innovation and eco-environment in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021,283: 124603.
[10] KALAPOUTI K, PETRIDIS K, MALESIOS C, et al. Measuring efficiency of innovation using combined Data envelopment analysis and structural equation modeling: empirical study in EU regions[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2017(11): 1-24.
[11] HASCHKA R E, HERWARTZ H. Innovation efficiency in European high-tech industries: evidence from a Bayesian stochastic frontier approach[J]. Research Policy, 2020,49(8): 104054.
[12] LI J, DU Y. Spatial effect of environmental regulation on green innovation efficiency: evidence from prefectural-level cities in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021,286: 125032.
[13] LI D, ZENG T. Are China’s intensive pollution industries greening? an analysis based on green innovation efficiency[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020,259: 120901.
[14] WANG S, ZHANG J, FAN F, et al. The symbiosis of scientific and technological innovation efficiency and economic efficiency in China:an analysis based on data envelopment analysis and logistic model[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2019,31(1): 67-80.
[15] LIN S, SUN J, MARINOVA D, et al. Evaluation of the green technology innovation efficiency of China's manufacturing industries: DEA window analysis with ideal window width[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2018,30(10): 1166-1181.
[16] LIN S, LIN R, SUN J, et al. Dynamically evaluating technological innovation efficiency of high-tech industry in China: provincial, regional and industrial perspective[J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 2021,74: 100939.
[17] FENG Y, ZHANG H, CHIU Y, et al. Innovation efficiency and the impact of the institutional quality: a cross-country analysis using the two-stage meta-frontier dynamic network DEA model[J]. Scientometrics, 2021,126: 3091-3129.
[18] AN Q, MENG F, XIONG B, et al. Assessing the relative efficiency of Chinese high-tech industries: a dynamic network data envelopment analysis approach[J]. Annals of Operations Research, 2020,290(1): 707-729.
[19] WANG Q, HANG Y, SUN L, et al. Two-stage innovation efficiency of new energy enterprises in China: a non-radial DEA approach[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016,112: 254-261.
[20] BANKER R D, CHARNES A, COOPER W W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis[J]. Management Science, 1984,30(9): 1078-1092.
[21] 刘满凤, 李圣宏. 基于三阶段DEA模型的我国高新技术开发区创新效率研究[J]. 管理评论, 2016,28(1): 42-52.
[22] 安勇, 王拉娣. 金融要素扭曲、地方政府行为与创新效率缺失[J]. 数理统计与管理, 2022,41(1): 135-147.
[23] 郑兵云, 杨宏丰. “一带一路”中国沿海城市港口效率评价——基于DEA博弈交叉效率-Tobit模型[J]. 数理统计与管理, 2021,40(3): 502-514.
[24] 逄淑媛, 陈德智. 专利与研发经费的相关性研究——基于全球研发顶尖公司10年面板数据的研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2009,27(10): 1500-1505.
[25] 张平, 张鹏鹏, 蔡国庆. 不同类型环境规制对企业技术创新影响比较研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2016,26(4): 8-13.
[26] YI S, FENGYAN C. Regional innovation systems based on stochastic frontier analysis: a study on thirty-one provinces in China[J]. Science, Technology and Society, 2015,20(2): 204-224.
[27] 肖仁桥, 钱丽, 陈忠卫. 中国高技术产业创新效率及其影响因素研究[J]. 管理科学, 2012,25(5): 85-98.
[28] 王云, 李延喜, 马壮, 等. 媒体关注、环境规制与企业环保投资[J]. 南开管理评论, 2017,20(6): 83-94.
[29] 陶锋, 赵锦瑜, 周浩. 环境规制实现了绿色技术创新的“增量提质”吗——来自环保目标责任制的证据[J]. 中国工业经济, 2021,38(2): 136-154.
[30] 夏玲. 政府补贴对企业R&D投入的影响——基于战略性新兴产业的实证分析[J]. 会计之友, 2020,38(24): 132-137.
[31] 苏屹, 林雨侬. 政府补贴对新能源企业R&D投入影响研究[J]. 科学管理研究, 2021,39(1): 102-110.
[32] 赵国宇, 禹薇. 大股东股权制衡的公司治理效应——来自民营上市公司的证据[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2018,40(11): 60-72.
[33] 张彩江, 陈璐. 政府对企业创新的补助是越多越好吗[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2016,37(11): 11-19.
[34] HONG J, FENG B, WU Y, et al. Do government grants promote innovation efficiency in China's high-tech industries[J]. Technovation, 2016,57-58(SI): 4-13.
[35] 邓立治. 中国汽车企业技术创新效率及其影响因素研究——以沪深上市公司为例[J]. 技术经济与管理研究, 2015,224(3): 26-31.
[36] 刘丰云, 沈亦凡, 何凌云. 补贴时点对新能源研发创新的影响与区域差异[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2021,31(1): 57-67.
[37] 戴浩, 柳剑平. 政府补助对科技中小型企业成长的影响机理——技术创新投入的中介作用与市场环境的调节作用[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2018,35(23): 137-145.