The digital innovation ecosystem is constantly breaking the boundaries of traditional innovation with the help of digital technology and platform enabling mechanisms, and has become an accelerator for digital economic growth and the transformation from old to new growth drivers. The resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem not only emphasizes the stability and adaptability of the main subjects, elements, environment, structure and function in digital innovation when subjected to external shocks and pressures, but also includes the evolutionary ability of upgrading to a system with better digital innovation efficiency. How should the resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem be measured? What antecedent conditions constitute the necessary conditions for the strong/weak resilience of digital innovation ecosystem? What antecedent configurations constitute sufficient conditions for the strong/weak resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem? Is there a significant spatio-temporal effect of antecedent configuration? These problems necessitate further scholarly investigation and in-depth discourse.
To explore the above issues, this research establishes an indicator system for regional digital innovation ecosystem resilience, comprising subsystems of subject diversity, element fluidity, environmental buffering, structural networking, and functional evolvement. Employing the "Wuli-Shili-Renli" (WSR) framework and dynamic QCA method, this research utilizes panel data from 30 provinces in China from 2011 to 2022 to explore the configurational paths of digital industry agglomeration, industrial diversification, innovation protection system, market institution, government innovation preference, and enterprise technological innovation level on enhancing the resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem.
The research reveals several findings. Firstly, market institution is a necessary condition for strong resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem, while other factors, although not necessary over time, are essential for certain provinces in terms of spatial dimension. Secondly, there are four configurational paths that contribute to robust resilience. These can be classified into two types: the WSR collaborative type and the SR cooperative type. In the WSR collaborative path, the "Wuli" condition of digital industry agglomeration, linked with other "Shili" and "Renli" conditions,is the keys to the resilient development of regional digital innovation ecosystem. In the SR cooperative path, "Shili" and "Renli" conditions play a synergistic role in the resilient development. These two types indicate that in the digital economy, governments and enterprises, as the "clever hands" in constructing resilience of regional digital innovation ecosystem, can achieve autonomous upgrading in a "resource-rich" scenario through digital industry agglomeration, or rely on the spillover effects of superior provincial digital industries to realize dependent upgrading in a "resource-scarce" predicament. Thirdly, there are four weak resilience paths, which can be categorized as hindrance type and deficiency type. The hindrance type emphasizes that in the absence of support from digital industry agglomeration and other "Shili" and "Renli" conditions, industrial diversification has posed a challenge to the resilience development of digital innovation ecosystem. The deficiency type is characterized by the lack of core and peripheral conditions in the "Wuli", "Shili", and "Renli" aspects during the resilient development of regional digital innovation ecosystem, representing a scenario where resources, technological capabilities, and entities are all absent. Fourthly, the consistency adjustment distances within and between groups are less than 0.2, indicating that the configurations do not exhibit significant temporal or case effects. However, by comparing the average coverage of each configuration across the four regions, there are certain commonalities and differences in configurational preferences among regions.
This study not only expands the comprehensive evaluation system of regional digital innovation ecosystem resilience, but also enriches the exploration of complex antecedent conditions of resilience formation of regional digital innovation ecosystem. At the same time, by combining WSR methodology and dynamic QCA method, the research extends the application boundary of WSR methodology and enriches the theoretical research on the resilience of digital innovation ecosystem in the context of China. In addition, dynamic QCA method breaks through the "time blind zone" problem of static data,and explores the antecedent configurations and evolutionary laws of digital innovation ecosystem resilience from the perspective of spatio-temporal dual dimension. Finally, the research conclusions provide a valuable path reference for the resilient development of regional digital innovation ecosystem, and contribute new insights and theoretical support for the high-quality development of digital economy.
Shu Hui
,
Tang Fei
. The Multidimensional Configuration Path for Enhancing Resilience of Regional Digital Innovation Ecosystem[J]. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2025
, 42(11)
: 85
-96
.
DOI: 10.6049/kjjbydc.2024040055
[1] 荆玲玲,黄慧丽.时空双维下数字创新生态系统对区域创新能力的激发与影响研究——基于省域面板数据的动态QCA分析[J].科技进步与对策,2024,41(16):13-23.
[2] 胡甲滨,俞立平,张宏如.数字创新韧性与高技术产业创新:机制及效应[J].山西财经大学学报,2023,45(4): 95-111.
[3] GU J F, ZHU Z C. The Wu-li Shi-li Ren-li approach (WSR): an oriental systems methodology[C]. Systems Methodology: Possibilities for Cross-Cultural Learning and Integration, 1995.
[4] CHAE B K. A general framework for studying the evolution of the digital innovation ecosystem: the case of big data[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2019, 45: 83-94.
[5] BELIAEVA T, FERASSO M, KRAUS S, et al. Dynamics of digital entrepreneurship and the innovation ecosystem: a multilevel perspective[J]. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 2019, 26(2): 266-284.
[6] SUSENO Y, LAURELL C, SICK N. Assessing value creation in digital innovation ecosystems: a social media analytics approach[J]. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2018, 27(4): 335-349.
[7] SENYO P K, LIU K, EFFAH J. Digital business ecosystem: literature review and a framework for future research[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2019, 47: 52-64.
[8] 李晓娣,饶美仙.区域数字创新生态系统发展路径研究——基于fsQCA的组态分析[J].管理工程学报,2023,37(6):20-31.
[9] 梁林,赵玉帛,刘兵.国家级新区创新生态系统韧性监测与预警研究[J].中国软科学,2020,35(7):92-111.
[10] 杨伟,劳晓云,周青,等.区域数字创新生态系统韧性的治理利基组态[J].科学学研究,2022,40(3):534-544.
[11] 毛毅坚.知识产权治理与数字创新韧性:基于准自然实验的证据[J].云南财经大学学报,2024,40(3): 97-110.
[12] 赵玉帛,张贵,王宏.数字经济产业创新生态系统韧性理念、特征与演化机理[J].软科学,2022,36(11):86-95.
[13] 彭亦谐,张玲玲,高畅.基于四阶段理论的可拓学学科发展阶段及与WSR方法论的对比研究[J].管理评论, 2023,35(12): 257-271.
[14] 袁歌骋,潘敏,覃凤琴.数字产业集聚与制造业企业技术创新[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2023,66(1):146-160.
[15] BOSCHMA R. Towards an evolutionary perspective on regional resilience[J]. Regional Studies, 2015, 49(5): 733-751.
[16] 徐圆,邓胡艳.多样化、创新能力与城市经济韧性[J].经济学动态,2020,61(8):88-104.
[17] 吕鲲,潘均柏,李北伟.全面创新改革试验、软环境与区域创新生态系统韧性——基于空间双重差分及双重机器学习的准自然实验[J].科技进步与对策,2024,41(16):24-36.
[18] 戴万亮,林小燕.什么样的环境要素组合有利于实现高区域创新效率——基于WSR方法论[J].科技进步与对策,2024,41(23):52-62.
[19] 戚聿东,杜博,叶胜然.知识产权与技术标准协同驱动数字产业创新:机理与路径[J].中国工业经济,2022,39(8):5-24.
[20] 潘珂,江旭.市场化改革对企业创新投入和创新效率的影响研究[J].科研管理,2024,45(2):127-136.
[21] 阮睿,孙榕,高秋男,等.如何行政发包——以省级政府目标驱动下的地方政府科技支出为例[J].财贸经济,2023,44(11):5-20.
[22] LIANG L, LI Y. How does government support promote digital economy development in China? the mediating role of regional innovation ecosystem resilience[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2023, 188: 122328.
[23] 贾勇,傅倩,汪琳,李冬姝.技术创新与企业韧性:基于新冠疫情情景[J].管理科学,2023,36(2):17-34.
[24] 杜运周,贾良定.组态视角与定性比较分析(QCA):管理学研究的一条新道路[J].管理世界, 2017,33(6):155-167.
[25] MISANGYI V F, ACHARYA A G. Substitutes or complements? a configurational examination of corporate governance mechanisms[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, 57(6): 1681-1705.
[26] GRECKHAMER T, MISANGYI V F, FISS P C. Chapter 3 the two QCAs: from a small-N to a large-N set theoretic approach[M]. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2013.
[27] SCHNEIDER C Q, WAGEMANN C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2012.
[28] CASTRO R G, ARINO M A. A general approach to panel data set-theoretic research[J]. Journal of Advances in Management Sciences & Information Systems, 2016, 2: 63-76.
[29] 张明,杜运周.组织与管理研究中QCA方法的应用:定位、策略和方向[J].管理学报,2019,16(9):1312-1323.