, 曾刚, 吕国庆Structural evolution of innovation networks of China's equipment manufacturing industry
WANGQiuyu, ZENGGang, LYUGuoqing通讯作者:
收稿日期:2015-06-2
修回日期:2015-09-11
网络出版日期:2016-02-25
版权声明:2016《地理学报》编辑部本文是开放获取期刊文献，在以下情况下可以自由使用：学术研究、学术交流、科研教学等，但不允许用于商业目的.
基金资助:
作者简介:
-->
展开
摘要
关键词：
Abstract
Keywords：
-->0
PDF (888KB)元数据多维度评价相关文章收藏文章
本文引用格式导出EndNoteRisBibtex收藏本文-->
1 引言
知识,网络,空间关系是经济地理学关注的热点词汇,不少****从产业集群与多维邻近性,跨国社区与技术守门员,全球网络与本地联系以及知识的类型与流动等侧面,对创新及其网络特征进行了论述[1].随着全球化的不断深化,创新对提升区域经济竞争力具有越来越重要的作用,本地与全球两个空间尺度创新要素,网络之间的关系成为地理****关注的科学问题[2-4].Scott,Cooke等新区域主义论者指出,产业区,产业集群,创新型区域等经济活动空间形态受区域社会,政治和文化背景影响,具有特定的地方网络范式[5-6];Coe等全球生产网络论者指出,地方性对创新具有阻滞效应,只有通过与外部进行知识传递,合作与学习,才能促进创新的产生[7-11];而Bathelt等关系经济论者则指出,只有通过全球生产网络与地方网络互动[12-13],本地蜂鸣--全球通道的互通[14],才能推进持续高效的创新.然而,驱动装备制造业合作网络创新的力量究竟来自于国外,还是来自于本地是学术界尚待回答的问题.此外,现有研究成果主要分析了发达国家创新合作网络的特征与机理,对发展中国家关注不足[15].2011年中国装备制造业产值为27.66万亿元,占全国工业总产值的比重高达32.76%,2013年占全球装备制造业总值的比重超过1/3,位居世界首位.而中国的创新政策,创新主体等与德,美等发达国家存在着较大的不同,中国装备制造业合作创新网络与欧美相比究竟有何特点?内部作用机理有何异同?同时,改革开放30多年来,大量外资,廉价劳动力和土地促进了中国的快速工业化.然而,由于劳动力,土地成本的大幅上升,资源环境约束逐渐显现,低成本的工业化难以为继,2015年3月13日中共中央,国务院适时发布了《关于深化体制机制改革加快实施创新驱动发展战略的若干意见》,更加重视产学研一体化和自主创新能力建设.作为提供技术装备的战略性产业,装备制造业创新水平的提高不仅对自身效率具有积极的影响,还能通过技术扩散,促进整个产业体系效率的提升.因此,归纳中国装备制造业的产学研创新网络特征,明确创新主体,摸清创新网络空间演化规律,确定主要影响因子及其作用机理十分重要.本文拟围绕这些问题开展研究,意在抛砖引玉.
2 文献综述
2.1 合作网络的创新主体
资源基础理论指出,企业是受到行政管理框架协调,有一定边界的资源集合体,内部资源以及知识和能力的积累是企业保持竞争优势的关键,而企业竞争优势在于其生产产品的异质性资源而非最终产品[16-17].但当企业在竞争中处于劣势时,需要通过不断向外合作获取新的核心资源,合作伙伴可以通过分担成本,共担风险和提供互补资源帮助企业提高竞争力[18].也就是说,合作创新是企业获得知识,弥补创新资源不足的有效途径.而社会网络结构对于信息和创新的扩散,技术和知识的交流非常重要[19-20].Jensen等则认为,企业与高校,研究机构等知识生产机构之间建立的基于R&D投资和人力资本的正式合作关系是创新的主要方式[21].Fitjar等进一步指出,与高校等研发机构合作产生的知识能够以编码化的形式进行传播,可以跨越更大的空间尺度,是企业创新的重要方式,而与供应商和竞争者的合作易受地理距离和认知距离的局限,有可能产生技术锁定,对创新的影响并不明显[22-23].在产学研创新网络中,科研机构肩负着创造,扩散知识与创新的任务,是本地和非本地知识溢出的关键来源,作为知识和技术网络的节点,是人才的集中地;企业作为知识溢出的主要受益者,接收网络中其他成员外溢的知识,通过实现创新产出带动整个网络创新能力的提高.对于知识密集型的企业来说,大学和研究院所的集中分布地区无疑具有明显的区位优势[24-26].装备制造企业合作的动力往往来源于解决特定问题的需要,产品定制促进了供应商和用户之间的创新合作,企业与高校及研究院所的合作则是更高层级的合作创新,多涉及到新技术的首次产业化,能够提高整个产业的创新能力[27-28].在创新网络中,不同国家创新主体并不完全相同.就装备制造业而言,美国装备制造业的创新主体是大型跨国公司;德国虽有西门子,博世等世界级巨头,但被称为"隐形冠军"的中小企业才是创新的主体.在一些专业机械领域,小型企业在世界市场的份额往往占有绝对优势地位[29].而关于中国装备制造业创新主体的问题,****的认识各不相同.胡云飞等认为,中国国有大中型企业在参与市场竞争的同时还要承担一定的社会责任,企业缺乏适应市场进行改组,改制的动力和压力,创新主体是非国有的大型企业[29];叶琴则指出,大型企业拥有较强的研发实力和声望,成为高校和科研机构最重要的合作伙伴,是创新的主体[20];吕国庆等则认为产学研创新网络中中心度较高的成员多为高校[30].因此,需要进一步明晰中国装备制造业产学研合作创新网络的主体构成及其演变过程[28].
2.2 创新合作的空间尺度
产业集聚可以促进区域内企业,高校以及科研机构的合作,共同的社会,文化,制度背景可以增强相互信任,有利于当地创新网络的形成[31].但随着经济全球化的深入,商品和技术得以跨越区域,国家和文化边界进行交换[32],跨国公司为降低成本和开拓新市场在世界各地建立分支机构,将全球各地的产业集聚区连接起来,形成了跨界合作网络[33].20世纪80年代以来,Scott等开始关注产业集群对技术创新和区域经济发展的重要推动作用,强调内生性因素,内部根植性,制度厚度对创新的决定性作用[5],认为产业集群的竞争优势来自于本地知识流动,劳动力市场等外部效应[34-36].Ibrahim指出,地方知识资源和知识溢出是美国通信集群竞争力的主要来源[37];而Dicken等****则指出,局限于区域内部的创新合作会导致区域锁定,企业获取外界知识的能力以及当地与外界知识节点建立联系的能力才是决定产业集群能否持续创新的重要因素[2].Lucas等分析了加拿大6个区域的ICT产业后指出,产业集群的外部联系比内部联系更加重要,产业集群内公司的竞争力来自于全球通道的构建[38];Huber认为英国剑桥信息技术集群竞争力并不是来自于本地知识溢出,而与国际人才汇集和剑桥品牌的全球影响力有关系[39].
Bathelt等则认为,通过跨国公司的本地化和本地企业的国际化,集群才能得到更好的发展,本地结网,跨区域联系是合作创新的关键[40].Sonderegger等指出,在不同发展阶段,不同空间尺度,产业集群创新合作方式不同,全球通道在产业集群演化的始末都具有重要作用,在产业集群发展的后期本地蜂鸣的作用更强[41].李二玲等对河南钢卷尺产业集群网络的形成和演化分析后指出,本地创新网络重要性随集群的发展有所降低,而全球供应链网络重要性则不断提升[42].张云伟对上海集成电路产业集群演化研究后发现,创新主要驱动要素逐渐由全球通道转向本地蜂鸣[33].
Asheim等认为,装备制造产业创新以综合性知识为基础,具有较强的空间情境性,重视面对面交流,地理邻近至关重要[43].回首改革开放以来的发展历程,中国装备制造业规模不断扩大,技术水平不断提高.然而,全球本地互动中哪一个空间尺度才是影响中国装备制造业合作创新的空间载体?不同发展阶段,合作创新空间载体一成不变吗?
2.3 创新网络的演化动力
地理邻近性,社会邻近性,认知邻近性是影响创新网络演化的重要因素[4, 44-45].地理邻近性促进了区内各种社会关系的形成,为具有相似特征的行为主体间知识流动创造了良好条件.20世纪初期,英国经济学家马歇尔指出,空间集聚产生的外部规模经济促进了企业间的知识外溢,"产业氛围"有利于产业区内企业的互动与知识共享;1986年,来自法国,意大利,瑞士等国的区域科学研究者组成的GREMI小组指出,地理集聚促进了企业的集体行动,而集体行动反过来又加快了企业间知识流动[45];Hoekman等对欧洲知识生产网络分析后发现,地理邻近是节点形成知识网络的基础,也是知识网络演化的首要驱动因子[46].社会邻近性有利于行为者之间信任感的建立,这种信任感会促进知识,特别是隐性知识的近距离与远距离的传递.企业在地理上的空间集聚为各种社会关系的形成提供了机会和可能,部分社会关系培育出信任关系,社会邻近开始发挥作用,成为企业获取网络外部知识的关键因素.Breschi等认为,人际社会网络是影响知识流动的重要原因[47].Owen-Smith等和Grabher分别对波士顿生物医药创新网络,伦敦Soho广告村和好莱坞电影娱乐产业进行实证研究后发现,网络创新绩效的提升不仅来源于本地互动,建立全球性战略伙伴也是影响网络绩效的主要途径[48-49].
认知邻近有利于相关企业采取集团行动,合作创新.Owen-Smith等强调技术守门员的"桥梁"作用,他们不仅能够寻找和吸收外部知识,还能为区域内部的企业处理和编译外部知识,有利于外部知识在区域内的扩散,但这也要求本地企业有足够认知能力接受这些知识[48].王秋玉等对东营石油装备业的研究则表明,本地认知能力相似的企业之间存在着较多的合作创新关系[50].
创新是不同主体在不同空间尺度上联合开展科技研发与应用的过程,而建立合作网络是降低创新风险,提高创新绩效的重要方式之一.Glückler认为,区域创新网络演化受初始环境和后续事件的影响,同时也与网络主体所采取的战略有关[51].中国装备制造业创新网络的主体,互动合作机制,空间范围随时间的不同而有所差异,这正是本文着力研究的重点.
3 研究数据和方法
合作发明专利是指多个实体单位联合申请,并获得政府部门批准的发明专利,它能较好地刻画多个实体单位之间级别最高的科技创新合作水平.Hagedoorn等对影响创新的因子进行比较分析后指出,合作发明专利是探讨知识共享和创新合作最直接,最有效的方式[52];Griliches和Suarez-Villa认为专利信息可以很好地表征创新产出和创新合作情 况[53-54];Huallachain等指出,联合申请发明专利正越来越多地作为关系数据被应用于科学研究,可以反映网络中相关节点基于创新活动所进行的合作[55].本文的合作发明专利数据来源于中国国家知识产权局专利检索与服务系统中的重点产业专利信息服务平台,并借助SPSS,UCINET,ArcGIS等定量分析工具对其进行计算分析.3.1 研究数据
中国国家知识产权局(SIPO)建立于1985年,其数据库中的专利分为发明专利,实用新型和外观设计.与实用新型和外观设计专利相比,发明专利的科技创新水平较高,原创色彩浓厚[56].因此,本文的研究数据主要来源于国家知识产权局专利检索与服务系统中的重点产业专利信息服务平台(http://www.chinaip.com.cn/)提供的装备制造业合作发明专利数据.由于在SIPO申请专利到获得批准需要18个月的时间,考虑到数据的完整性,研究区间设置为1985-2012年.研究的专利数据库中每一个专利至少有两个合作者.数据的筛选处理通过以下4个步骤进行:① 每一个专利的合作发明者中,至少包括一个位于中国大陆的企业和一所大陆高校或研究所;② 聚焦于不同主体之间的合作关系,删除了子公司与母公司之间,同一系统不同单位之间的合作专利;③ 满足前两个条件的专利总数为19046个.将这些专利的主体分为国有企业,民营企业,高校,研究所和中外合资企业5种类型.创新主体的基本信息来自注册记录,并通过网站查询进行二次确认;④ 在地理空间分析中,每一个主体归属于一个城市,市内合作是指与位于同一个城市内多主体之间的合作,省内合作是指发生在城市之外,本省之内的合作,国内合作是指发生在本省之外,本国之内的合作;北京,上海,天津和重庆是中国的4个直辖市,直辖市内的创新合作划入市内合作.
3.2 变量选取
回归分析:可以展示解释变量与被解释变量之间的相互关系和影响程度.笔者用回归分析方法来厘清影响企业合作空间尺度的因素及其作用机制.自变量:企业与其他主体合作发明专利的空间尺度.以企业所在城市为基准,笔者将市内,省内,国内作为自变量,1代表在该尺度内发生过一次创新合作,每个尺度用创新合作的总次数进行衡量.
企业特征:企业特征影响其创新决策,创新合作伙伴选择,创新合作方式和绩效表现[57].Balland等在2013年指出,企业在观察年份内参与合作创新的次数可以表示企业的创新活跃程度和创新能级[58].
合作伙伴:企业是创新的主体,企业创新合作伙伴包括高校,研究所,国有企业,民营企业与合资企业,笔者用合作发明的专利数量来衡量企业与该类型主体的合作情况.
创新环境:由欧洲区域经济研究学派提出,是指区内创新主体,集体效率以及创新行为所产生的协同作用.国内知名创新研究专家,上海交通大学罗守贵教授等****指出,人均GDP,高校数量,R&D占本地GDP比重等指标是衡量区域创新环境质量的重要指标[59].相关数据来源于《中国城市统计年鉴2013》,《中国科技统计年鉴2013》.
创新层级:中国高校,研究所等创新资源空间分布极不平衡[60],对所在地企业创新活动的影响也很不相同.将参与合作发明专利数排名前30位的城市,按其重要程度分为直辖市,省会城市和重要城市,用来表征企业的合作空间尺度特征.
4 产学研合作创新网络的结构分析
1984年之前,中国没有建立系统的专利制度,仅出台了一些单一的发明和技术改进奖励政策措施[61].1984年在借鉴国外特别是德国经验的基础上,中国颁布了第一部专利法.从1985年开始,根据中国装备制造业产学研合作创新网络发展情况,可以分为以下3个阶段:第一阶段为起步阶段(1985-2000年).1985年中国开始受理专利申请,并于1992年对专利法进行了第一次修订,加强了对专利申请人权益的保护.在此阶段,申请专利单位少,国有企业占申请单位总数的比重达46.07%,参与合作发明了79.35%的专利,居于绝对的垄断地位.专利批准总量小,年均增长仅为10%;第二阶段为稳步增长阶段(2001-2006年).2000年8月25日,第九届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十七次会议通过了《关于修改<中华人民共和国专利法>的决定》,赋予了非国有企业与全民所有制,集体所有制企业同等的地位,以呼应中国改革并与国际接轨,为2001年中国加入世贸组织做准备[62].2001年,对中国高校专业设置进行了调整,加强了面向创新需求的高新技术类学科专业和应用型学科专业建设,旨在为创新提供必需的工程技术人才.受其影响,非国有单位占申请单位总数的比重从2001年的37.59%上升到2006年的52.86%,非国有企业的发明专利批准数超过了国有企业专利批准数,国有企业不再是多个单位联合申报专利的主体.中国发明专利批准量呈现出逐渐上升的趋势,发明专利数从2001年的244项增加到2006年的968项,年均增长率提高到38.69%;第三阶段为快速增长阶段(2007年起).2006年,全国科学技术大会提出要加强自主创新,全面建设创新型国家,教育部,国家发展改革委下达了《2006年全国普通高等教育招生计划的通知》,要求高校成为区域创新网络的主角.同年,国务院印发《关于加快振兴装备制造业的若干意见》,为中国装备制造业创新发展创造了良好的制度环境,中国吸收的外来投资从2007年的747.68亿美元增加到2012年的1117.16亿美元,R&D投入从3710.2亿元增加到10298.4亿元,发明专利数共增加了14089项[63].高校一跃成为多个单位联合申报发明专利的主体,在该阶段,高校参与发明了87.88%的专利(图1).
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图11985-2012年中国装备制造产业产学研创新网络描述性统计分析
-->Fig. 1Historical development of patents and inventors compositions in China, 1985-2012
-->
4.1 创新主体演变
1985年以来,中国装备制造业产学研创新合作主体结构发生了较大变化,"国退民进"趋势明显(图2).从主体结构来看,在第一阶段,研究所和国有企业的数量分别高于高校和民营企业;在第二和第三阶段,企业的比例逐渐增加,且民营企业成为最重要的创新主体,在第三阶段占比甚至高达一半以上;高校和研究所的占比逐渐降低,占比小于50%,研究所下降幅度更加明显.2000年之后国有企业和民营企业的比例一直超过50%,在2011年甚至高达78.44%,成为中国装备制造业创新网络的主体,而合资企业的比例一直低于1%.
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图21985-2012年中国装备制造产业产学研创新主体结构演变
-->Fig. 2Historical changes of inventors compositions at three development stages in China, 1985-2012
-->
从创新主体合作网络演化情况来看(图3),在第一阶段,创新主体数量为1796个.根据其重要性排序,依次为国有企业,中科院部门以及位于北京和东北的高校,且均与钢铁,铝及化工等重工业相关.改革开放以来,为了促进科技的转移和扩散,中共中央,国务院启动了一系列改革计划,1987年将高科技企业从国有研究所和高校中剥离出来,北大方正脱离北京大学,清华紫光脱离清华大学,联想集团脱离中科院计算机研究所,1990年代进一步将中央各部委所属的242个应用型研究所直接划入相关国有企业[63-64],极大地提升了企业的自主创新能力,为发挥企业创新主体作用创造了良好的条件.
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图3中国装备制造业产学研创新主体合作网络演化
-->Fig. 3Historical evolution of co-inventor networks structures at three development stages in China
-->
在第二阶段,创新主体数量增加到2276个.随着有关民营企业的种种障碍被清除,以及民营创新服务体系的建立,民营企业不仅成为很多产业的主导者,在创新方面也取得了巨大成功,研发投入和专利发明不断增加[27].装备工业网络中具有较强中心性的创新主体除了国有企业外,华为等少数民营企业也成为重要的创新主体.随着研究型院校的建立以及企业研发对创新合作伙伴的需求不断提高,高校的地位不断提升,高校逐渐成为区域创新网络中的主角.但从地区分布来看,东北地区的东北大学,东北工学院的重要性下降,而长江三角洲的复旦大学,浙江大学,上海交通大学重要性上升.
在第三阶段,创新网络中主体数量高达7065个,网络规模非常庞大,创新主体之间合作密集.受惠于2006年的高校专业结构调整,高校成为最重要的创新节点,国有企业仅在矿产和能源等传统产业领域占据优势地位,民营企业仍然受制于创新资本匮乏,总体地位不高.
不同所有制企业选择合作对象的倾向性不同.大型国有企业受上级政府影响,倾向于系统内的研究所合作,而中小型民企则出于自身利益考量,倾向于与高校合作[65].在国有企业和民营企业的创新合作网络中,高校相对于研究所的重要性分别为3.98和4.58,国有企业相对倾向于和研究所合作;民营企业相对倾向于和高校合作(表1).
Tab. 1
表1
表1中国不同合作主体间合作比例(%)
Tab. 1Composition of patents co-inventors among different actors
| 高校 | 研究所 | 国有 | 民营 | 合资 | 总计 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 国有 | 75.00 | 18.86 | 1.65 | 4.27 | 0.04 | 100 |
| 民营 | 77.06 | 16.81 | 2.71 | 3.21 | 0.04 | 100 |
| 合资 | 77.78 | 17.87 | 1.45 | 2.90 | 0.00 | 100 |
新窗口打开
4.2 创新主体合作的空间尺度
高科技园和经济开发区是中国企业融入创新网络的重要平台.由于装备制造业的特性,导致其产学研创新网络呈现出独特的空间特征.下面将从市内,省内,国内,海外4个空间尺度出发,对主体的创新合作空间网络进行分析.不同时期主导的空间载体不完全相同.2000年之前,市内,国内是最重要的合作空间,省内合作较少发生,海外合作基本可以忽略不计;2000年之后,按对创新合作的影响力大小排序,依次为市内,国内,省内和海外(图4a).此外,创新合作的空间范围呈现先扩展,后稳定的态势.2000年之前,创新合作者之间的平均距离总体上处于不断攀升状态;2000年之后,创新合作距离趋于稳定,在426 km上下轻微浮动(图4b).
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图41985-2012年创新合作空间结构和平均距离的时间演变
-->Fig. 4Historical development of spatial structure and average geographical distance, 1985-2012
-->
不同创新主体偏向的空间载体不同.民营企业更倾向于与市内其他主体合作,很少与省内其他主体开展合作;而国有企业基于其强大实力,更倾向于与国内其他主体进行创新合作;很多高校研究经费来自于省级政府,因而倾向于与省内企业开展合作;而独立研究所基于距离衰减规律,更偏向市内合作,中科院以及中央部委,大型国企所属的研究所由于R&D资金主要来自中央,更偏向于在国家层面上开展合作(图5).
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图5不同主体创新空间尺度的对比
-->Fig. 5Historical comparison of spatial structure between public sectors and firms
-->
综上可知,中国装备制造业产学研创新网络中,不同空间尺度主导的创新主体各不相同,同一创新主体在不同的空间尺度拥有不同的比较优势.R&D经费来源,主体的社会属性等在创新合作伙伴选择过程中发挥着重要作用.
4.3 城市创新合作的空间结构
Andersson等认为,中国国家创新系统根植于强势政府的土壤中,很多重要高校和研究机构位于首都北京以及上海,杭州,广州等直辖市和省会城市,行政中心城市也就成为创新合作主体的所在地[66].中国装备制造业产学研创新网络密度图显示,东部沿海城市在中国创新城市中具有引领地位[67],北京始终处于创新网络的顶端,长三角和珠三角次之,上海,杭州,广州,南京等城市创新中心地位逐渐强化,"创新三角"态势初现(图6b).从发展演化来看,成渝城市群在装备制造业创新合作网络中的地位开始缓慢上升,"创新三角"有向"创新四边形"发展的趋势(图6c).
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图6中国装备制造业产学研创新网络中城市合作的空间结构演变
-->Fig. 6Historical development of co-inventor network structures in China
-->
知识的外部性和流动性是创新合作的前提,不同创新主体相互作用形成的知识网络会提高创新源的创新能力,在空间上表现为城市创新网络.由于各个城市拥有的科研机构,R&D投资能力,政策环境不完全相同,北京,上海创新条件最佳,广州,杭州等省会发达城市次之,其他城市较差,条件较差城市除了接受条件较好城市的知识,技术溢出之外,受创新成果的累积效应影响,还会主动寻求与条件较好的城市开展创新合作,借此提高自身创新能力,进而形成了以北京为中心的中国产学研创新网络层级式特征[68-69].
中国城市创新网络的层级特征鲜明.1986-2012年期间,共有323个城市参与中国装备制造业的产学研创新合作,在发明专利数量上排名前30的城市所拥有的创新主体占创新主体总数的比例为67.81%,占合作发明专利的比重高达93.18%,是中国装备制造业创新的重要支点[70](图7a).从空间分布来看,合作创新水平最高的前30名城市主要位于中国东部地区,北京,上海居于绝对优势地位.1986-2012年,北京拥有5311个专利,1199个创新主体;上海次之,拥有3580个专利,996个创新主体;杭州,广州,南京,深圳紧跟其后(图7a).
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图7中国城市创新合作空间尺度分析
-->Fig. 7The spatial configuration of the innovation cooperation network in China
-->
在科学知识网络里具有结构洞位置的区域,不仅可以凭借网络中心性直接访问不同的知识库,还有能力通过不同渠道在区域内部传播知识进而促进学习,这些城市将信息和知识转化为创新的能力较强,创新绩效更为显著.但是,缺乏有利网络位置的区域,获得最新知识的机会较少,学习能力较差,创新能级较低,创新收益少[71].从合作空间载体的结构来看,位居创新排名前30的城市偏向于市内,国内二个空间尺度的合作.而位居30名之外的城市则将国内视为最重要的合作载体,约占合作总数的一半左右,省内合作成为次优选择,市内合作所占比例很小(图7b).
4.4 创新合作空间尺度的影响因子
创新合作空间尺度的影响因子与城市平均创新距离有关.运用最小二乘法,对中国装备制造业不同创新合作尺度的影响因子进行了多重模拟和计算,并对多重共线性,线性预测的非线性和重大异常值进行了分析,没有发现严重的异常情况,证明计算结果可信(表2).多重模拟和计算表明,企业特征显著影响企业的创新空间载体,企业创新活跃程度在模型1中显著为正,在模型2中显著为负,说明创新能级较高的企业一般位于人力资源和科技资源丰富的城市,并倾向于与市内主体进行合作.Tab. 2
表2
表2对不同创新合作尺度的回归分析
Tab. 2Regression result of various innovation cooperation scales
| 创新空间 | 模型1 本市 | 模型2 本省 | 模型3 本国 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 企业特征 | 创新能级 | 0.083*** | -0.068*** | -0.001 |
| 创新环境 | 人均GDP | 0.065*** | -0.086*** | 0.046*** |
| 高校数量 | 0.396*** | -0.147*** | -0.176*** | |
| 研发占比 | -0.101*** | 0.244*** | -0.191*** | |
| 合作伙伴 | 高校 | 0.319*** | 0.612*** | 0.379*** |
| 研究所 | 0.213*** | 0.299*** | 0.133*** | |
| 国有 | 0.116*** | 0.002 | 0.090*** | |
| 民营 | 0.210*** | 0.185*** | 0.081*** | |
| 合资 | 0.023* | 0.010 | 0.001 | |
| 城市的创新层级 | 直辖市(4) | -0.042*** | -0.109*** | 0.162*** |
| 省会城市(14) | -0.077*** | 0.054*** | 0.008 | |
| 重要城市(12) | -0.006 | 0.029*** | -0.034*** | |
| R2 | 0.493 | 0.612 | 0.383 | |
| 调整R2 | 0.492 | 0.611 | 0.382 | |
新窗口打开
不同因子对不同水平城市创新合作的影响不同.在创新环境变量中,城市人均GDP在模型1和模型3中显著为正,在模型2中显著为负,说明城市经济水平越高,企业倾向于在本市,国内二个空间载体开展创新合作;城市高校数量只在模型1中显著为正,说明了创新资源对企业具有很强的吸引力,高校越多,知识溢出随之也多,创新合作发生的频率也随之增加;R&D投入占GDP比重只在模型2中显著为正,说明省内R&D投入占GDP的比重越高,省政府对省内主体之间的创新合作引导力越强,对企业合作创新行为的影响就越大[72].Scherngell等指出,中国国家创新系统中行政壁垒现象突出[73],各级政府的科技政策,R&D投资明显偏向行政区内的本地各主体之间的创新合作[74].
在主体构成中,高校,研究所,民营企业在3个模型中都显著正相关,并且在模型1中高校,研究所,民营的系数呈现从高到低的排列顺序,高校,研究所,民营企业都是创新主体,其重要性依次递减.此外,高校,研究所,国有企业,民营企业,合资企业等5类行为主体在模型1中都显著为正,说明了市内合作是其最重要的合作空间.
创新水平排名前30的城市的性质不同,创新合作空间载体也不完全相同.位于不同区域的企业与不同类型城市的高校或研究所之间的合作,对于直辖市来说,在模型1和模型2中显著为负,在模型3中显著为正,说明北京,上海占据了中国创新网络的中心位置,对全国其他地区企业来此开展创新合作的吸引力强劲,区域外部的合作比例甚至高于内部合作;省会城市高校,研究所对省内企业的吸引力强度高于市内企业;重要城市在模型2中显著为正,在模型3中显著为负,说明重要城市的高校,研究所只能吸引省内企业前来进行创新合作,对省外企业的吸引力有限.与Andersson的分析结果基本一致[66].
5 结论和展望
5.1 结论
① 中国装备制造业创新核心主体经历了从国有企业,经民营企业,逐渐过渡到以高校为主的过程.高校和民营企业已经成为创新网络中重要的创新主体;② 市内是中国装备工业合作创新网络最重要的空间载体,城市创新资源多寡,地方政府的创新政策,R&D投入对创新合作网络建设具有重要影响;③ 1985年以来,中国装备制造业产学研合作创新网络先后经历了起步,稳步增长和快速增长3个阶段.从演变过程来看,创新主体的平均创新距离呈现先增加,后稳定,创新合作网络空间范畴呈现先扩张,后稳定的态势;④ 由于创新资源空间分布的不平衡,创新水平排名前30位的城市是中国装备制造创新合作网络的重要支点,以北京为中心的京津冀城市群,以上海为中心的长三角城市群,以广州为中心的珠三角城市群构成了中国"创新三角".从发展趋势看,成渝城市群可能会加入创新支点系列,有望构成"创新四边形".与美,德,日等发达国家的装备制造创新网络最重要的空间载体为国际,最重要的创新主体为企业不同,中国最重要的空间载体为市内,最重要的主体为高校.因此,充分调动地方政府的积极性,推进高校的创新改革对于提高装备工业网络的创新能力和绩效具有十分重要的作用.5.2 展望
展望未来,如何科学,准确地刻画中国装备制造业创新合作网络与欧美国家之间,装备制造业创新合作网络与其他制造业创新合作网络之间的异同,如何挖掘中国装备制造业创新合作网络发展演化过程蕴藏的经济地理学理论基础和科学规律,值得继续深化相关研究.The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
参考文献 原文顺序
文献年度倒序
文中引用次数倒序
被引期刊影响因子
| [1] | |
| [2] | Over the years, geographers have developed a disturbing - even dysfunctional - habit of missing out on important intellectual and politically significant debates, even those in which geographers would seem to have a major role to play. The syndrome of processes currently bundled together within the term `globalization' is intrinsically geographical, as are the outcomes of such processes. Yet, once again, it seems, we are not, as a discipline, centrally involved in what are clearly very `big issues' indeed. The purpose of this paper is to explore, in the context of ongoing globalization debates, the bases of this undesirable situation and to consider what might be done to redress it in ways that could both enhance intra- and interdisciplinarity and also make a contribution towards building a better world. |
| [3] | . Abstract: Contemporary research on innovative processes makes use of a range of scales, from the global to the regional/local. In addition, network-based approaches have introduced a non-territorially bounded dimension to studies of innovation. While much of the latter has, to date, been concerned with local networks, recent work has pointed to the importance of non-local interconnections. This paper seeks to build upon such insights suggesting that greater attention be given to extra-local connections in studies of innovation. We explore ways in which extra-local interconnection may be extended beyond the globalization of formalized R&D by, and between, transnational corporations (TNCs), which is the overwhelming preoccupation of existing research. The paper is divided into two main parts. The first consists of a review of work on the three key scales of innovation. The second considers the role of firms and individuals as key actors in systems of innovation, and suggests how network-based approaches may offer the best way for analysing how these actors operate through and across spatial scales. In conclusion, we emphasize the need to further investigate non-TNC-based dimensions of extra-local interconnection. |
| [4] | . |
| [5] | . Scott A. J. (2002) A new map of Hollywood: the production and distribution of American motion pictures, Reg. Studies 36, 957-975. In this paper, I offer a reinterpretation of the economic geography of the so-called new Hollywood. The argument proceeds in six main stages. First, I briefly examine the debate on industrial organization in Hollywood that has gone on in the literature since the mid-1980s, and I conclude that the debate has become unnecessarily polarized. Second, I attempt to show how an approach that invokes both flexible specialization and systems-house forms of production is necessary to any reasonably complete analysis of the organization of production in the new Hollywood. Third, and on this basis, I argue that the Hollywood production system is deeply bifurcated into two segments comprising: (1) the majors and their cohorts of allied firms on the one hand; and (2) the mass of independent production companies on the other. Fourth, I reaffirm the continuing tremendous agglomerative attraction of Hollywood as a locale for motion-picture production, but I also describe in analytical and empirical terms how selected kinds of activities seek out satellite production locations in other parts of the world. Fifth, I show how the majors continue to extend their global reach by means of their ever more aggressive marketing and distribution divisions, and I discuss how this state of affairs depends on and amplifies the competitive advantages of Hollywood. Sixth and finally, I reflect upon some of the challenges that Hollywood must face up to as new cultural-products agglomerations arise all over the globe, offering potential challenges to its hegemony. |
| [6] | . Today, the number one priority for competitive advantage is innovation. A new approach to regional business development has been pioneered in Europe and the U.S.A. This involves building a regional innovation infrastructure. Learning through “networking” has proven to be a successful approach in some of Europe's more dynamic regional economics such as Baden-Württemberg and Emilia-Romagna. This involves maximising the complete range of regional innovation assets. The state of Pennsylvania and other older industry centres are showing that such an approach is transferable from Europe to the U.S.A. The paper assesses knowledge-transfer at the regional level and outlines the key elements for successful regional innovation networking practices. The major finding(s) are that business networking is an effective way of increasing company turnover; that not-for-profit organizations are excellent for setting up networks because they are trusted, and that innovation networks are perhaps the most difficult, thought-requiring but important of the types of business network conceivable. |
| [7] | Understanding and conceptualizing the complexities of the contemporary global economy is a challenging but vitally important task. In this article, we criticall |
| [8] | . Recent literature concerning regional development has placed significant emphasis on local institutional structures and their capacity to `hold down' the global. Conversely, work on inter-firm networks - such as the global commodity chain approach - has highlighted the significance of the organizational structures of global firms' production systems and their relation to industrial upgrading. In this paper, drawing upon a global production networks perspective, we conceptualize the connections between `globalizing' processes, as embodied in the production networks of transnational corporations, and regional development in specific territorial formations. We delimit the `strategic coupling' of the global production networks of firms and regional economies which ultimately drives regional development through the processes of value creation, enhancement and capture. In doing so, we stress the multi-scalarity of the forces and processes underlying regional development, and thus do not privilege one particular geographical scale. By way of illustration, we introduce an example drawn from recent research into global production networks in East Asia and Europe. The example profiles the investments of car manufacturer BMW in Eastern Bavaria, Germany and Rayong, Thailand, and considers their implications for regional development. |
| [9] | . |
| [10] | . |
| [11] | ABSTRACT Executive summary Drawing knowledge from external – especially international – sources has become increasingly important to small and medium-sized firms (SMEs). As these firms cannot generate all they need to know to develop new products and processes within their own companies, they need to look elsewhere for new ideas and expertise. This is what is known as knowledge sourcing. In a practical sense, knowledge sourcing may involve learning to use new technology and equipment, especially that used by customers or suppliers. It may involve drawing on new scientific research from universities to facilitate innovation. Or, it can mean using expert marketing advice or technical or business development expertise that is not available in-house. Being able to effectively access knowledge from external sources is increasingly recognised as a key factor in a firm's competitiveness. Therefore, we need a better understanding of how companies source knowledge and how this impacts on their performance. We also need to know which types of knowledge sourcing amount to good practice and best help small firms to learn new things. |
| [12] | In this paper, we argue that a paradigmatic shift is occurring in economic geography toward a relational economic geography. This rests on three propositions. First, from a structural perspective economic actors are situated in contexts of social and institutional relations. Second, in dynamic perspective economic processes are path-dependent, constrained by history. Third, economic processes are contingent in that the agents' strategies and actions are open-ended. Drawing on Storper's holy trinity, we define four ions as the basis for analysis in economic geography: organization, evolution, innovation, and interaction. Therein, we employ a particular spatial perspective of economic processes using a geographical lens. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press. |
| [13] | . Recent theoretical and empirical work in economic geography has experienced what might be termed a ‘relational turn’ that focuses primarily on the ways in which socio-spatial relations of economic actors are intertwined with processes of economic change at various geographical scales. This phenomenon begs the questions of whether the ‘relational turn’ is simply an explicit reworking of what might be an undercurrent in economic geography during the late 1970s and the 1980s, and whether this ‘turn’ offers substantial advancement in our theory and practice. In this paper, I aim to evaluate critically the nature and emergence of this relational economic geography by revisiting its antecedents and conceptual frameworks. This evaluation opens up some significant conceptual issues that are further reworked in this paper. In particular, I argue that much of the work in this ‘relational turn’ is relational only in a thematic sense, focusing on various themes of socio-spatial relations without theorizing sufficiently the nature of relationality and its manifestation through power relations and actor-specific practice. This paper thus illuminates the nature of relationality and the multiple ways through which power works itself out in ‘relational geometries’, defined as the spatial configurations of heterogeneous power relations. As a preliminary attempt, I first conceptualize different forms of power in such relational geometries and their causal effects in producing concrete/spatial outcomes. I then show how this relational view can offer an alternative understanding of a major research concern in contemporary economic geography – regional development. |
| [14] | . The paper is concerned with spatial clustering of economic activity and its relation to the spatiality of knowledge creation in various sorts of interactive learning processes. It questions the merit of the prevailing explanatory model where the realm of tacit knowledge transfer is confined to local milieus whereas codified knowledge may roam the globe almost frictionless. When doing so the paper highlights the conditions under which both tacit and codified knowledge can be exchanged locally and globally. A distinction is made between, on the one hand, the learning processes taking place among actors embedded in a community by just being there - dubbed buzz - and, on the other, the knowledge attained by investing in building channels of communication - called pipelines - to selected providers located outside the local milieu. It is argued, that the co-existence of high levels of buzz and many pipelines may provide firms located in outward looking and lively clusters with a string of particular advantages not available to outsiders. Finally, some prescriptive elements, stemming from the argument, are identified. |
| [15] | . This paper investigates the developing spatial and social division of labor in the Greater Shanghai chemical industry. This industry experienced strong growth after the Asian financial crisis, when policy support was extended beyond “new economy” industries to include traditional manufacturing sectors. Based on a conceptualization that emphasizes the role of producer–user networks and interactive learning as a basis for ongoing innovation and business success, an explorative study was designed to investigate the supplier and customer linkages in different locations of the Greater Shanghai region. The results suggest that inter-firm networks are not extensive and often involve limited producer–user interaction. Important chemical firms in the region concentrate on business with their established international customer basis, use state-controlled distribution channels or rely on intermediaries that act as knowledge brokers. Neither of these practices of market interaction includes intensive information exchange and feedback on products, customer experience and demand changes. As such, these practices do not provide a sound basis for self-sustained growth or innovation in the future. The paper concludes that regional policy needs to support the establishment of combined “bonding” and “bridging” relations between chemical producers and their user industries. |
| [16] | . |
| [17] | . Firms can be analyzed from the resource or product aspect. This paper develops simple economic tools for analyzing a firm's resource position, and uses a resour |
| [18] | . 当前技术发展的特征使合作创新 成为一种必然趋势。本文分别运用企业资源和能力理论、交易成本理论和产业组织理论从不同的角度解释了合作创新的原因及其存在的合理性 ,并将企业参与合作创新的动机归纳为三个方面 :与研究开发有关的合作动机 ,与技术学习和技术获取有关的合作动机 ,以及与市场进入有关的合作动机 . 当前技术发展的特征使合作创新 成为一种必然趋势。本文分别运用企业资源和能力理论、交易成本理论和产业组织理论从不同的角度解释了合作创新的原因及其存在的合理性 ,并将企业参与合作创新的动机归纳为三个方面 :与研究开发有关的合作动机 ,与技术学习和技术获取有关的合作动机 ,以及与市场进入有关的合作动机 |
| [19] | . |
| [20] | . . |
| [21] | . This paper contrasts two modes of innovation. One, the Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) mode, is based on the production and use of codified scientific |
| [22] | . This Paper examines the sources of firm product and process innovation in Norway. It uses a purpose-built survey of 1604 firms in the five largest Norwegian city-regions to test, by means of a logit regression analysis, Jensen et al.'s (2007) contention that firm innovation is both the result of 'Science, Technology and Innovation' (STI) and 'Doing, Using and Interacting' (DUI) modes of firm learning. The paper classifies different types of firm interaction into STI-mode interaction (with consultants, universities, and research centres) and DUI-mode interaction, distinguishing between DUI interaction within the supply-chain (i.e. with suppliers and customers) or not (with competitors). It further controls for the geographical locations of partners. The analysis demonstrates that engagement with external agents is closely related to firm innovation and that both STI and DUI-modes of interaction matter. However, it also shows that DUI modes of interaction outside the supply-chain tend to be irrelevant for innovation, with frequent exchanges with competitors being associated with lower levels of innovation. Collaboration with extra-regional agents is much more conducive to innovation than collaboration with local partners, especially within the DUI mode. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
| [23] | 基于微观网络结构和宏观网络聚类的视角,借助联合申请发明专利数 据作为支撑,选取东北三省装备制造业合作创新网络作为研究对象,分析了网络结构变量对网络成员创新产出影响效应及整体网络的聚类特征,讨论了网络特征对网 络成员创新影响的作用效应及网络成员作用于网络的表现.结果表明:东北三省装备制造业合作创新网络中,中心性和结构洞对网络成员创新产出起到正向促进作 用,而中间中心性并没有有效地促进创新产出；网络整体呈现“核心-边缘”的结构范式,几个创新能力较强的网络成员引领着联系紧密的子网络,处于整体网络的 核心位置；由于网络连接的单一性,紧密连接的稳定网络并不一定会对其内部成员具有较大的作用力；网络密度对网络成员中介作用具有很大影响,并且创新能力较 弱的成员倾向于与创新能力较强的成员组建网络密度较大技术创新联盟. 基于微观网络结构和宏观网络聚类的视角,借助联合申请发明专利数 据作为支撑,选取东北三省装备制造业合作创新网络作为研究对象,分析了网络结构变量对网络成员创新产出影响效应及整体网络的聚类特征,讨论了网络特征对网 络成员创新影响的作用效应及网络成员作用于网络的表现.结果表明:东北三省装备制造业合作创新网络中,中心性和结构洞对网络成员创新产出起到正向促进作 用,而中间中心性并没有有效地促进创新产出；网络整体呈现“核心-边缘”的结构范式,几个创新能力较强的网络成员引领着联系紧密的子网络,处于整体网络的 核心位置；由于网络连接的单一性,紧密连接的稳定网络并不一定会对其内部成员具有较大的作用力；网络密度对网络成员中介作用具有很大影响,并且创新能力较 弱的成员倾向于与创新能力较强的成员组建网络密度较大技术创新联盟. |
| [24] | . 促进知识经济发展的关键是建立 和完善国家创新系统，而创新系统中知识流动的效率是解释国家创新能力高低最重要的指标。高新技术企业和知识的生产和传播者在空间上的集聚现象说明知识的流 动是一个空间过程。从创新系统的区域层次性、知识流动的区位效应以及知识创新的区域分工等现象中，可以看到从地理学角度研究国家创新系统的切入点。 . 促进知识经济发展的关键是建立 和完善国家创新系统，而创新系统中知识流动的效率是解释国家创新能力高低最重要的指标。高新技术企业和知识的生产和传播者在空间上的集聚现象说明知识的流 动是一个空间过程。从创新系统的区域层次性、知识流动的区位效应以及知识创新的区域分工等现象中，可以看到从地理学角度研究国家创新系统的切入点。 |
| [25] | . Abstract.68 Collaboration and the exchange of knowledge are supposedly made easier by geographical proximity because of the tacit character of knowledge. Recently a number of scholars' criticised this view on geographical proximity as being oversimplified and argued that the precise role of geographical proximity for knowledge exchange and collaboration still remains unclear. This paper analyses the role of geographical proximity for collaborative scientific research in science-based technologies between universities, companies and governmental research institutes. We test the hypothesis that the collaboration between different kinds of organisations is more geographically localised than collaboration between organisations that are similar due to institutional proximity. Using data on co-publications, collaborations patterns are analysed and the hypothesis is confirmed. Abstract.68 La colaboración y el intercambio de conocimiento son supuestamente más fáciles si hay una proximidad geográfica debido al carácter tácito del conocimiento. Varios investigadores han criticado recientemente esta suposición sobre la proximidad geográfica como simplista argumentando que el papel preciso que juega la proximidad geográfica en el intercambio de conocimiento y la colaboración aun no está claro. Este artículo analiza el rol de la proximidad geográfica en la investigación científica colaborativa en tecnologías de base científica entre universidades e institutos de investigación privados o gubernamentales. Analizamos la hipótesis de que la colaboración entre tipos diferentes de organizaciones es más localizada geográficamente que la colaboración entre organizaciones que son similares debido a su proximidad institucional. Usando datos sobre co-publicaciones, se analizan patrones de colaboración y se confirma la hipótesis. |
| [26] | |
| [27] | . The authors address the dichotomy around ‘proximate’ and ‘distant’ learning processes by looking specifically at the characteristics of the knowledge-creation process. By way of suggesting an alternative conceptualization to the well-known tacit02–02codified knowledge dichotomy, they propose a distinction between ‘analytical’ and ‘synthetic’ modes of knowledge creation. Analytical knowledge creation refers to the understanding and explaining of features of the (natural) world. Synthetic knowledge creation refers to the design or construction of something to attain functional goals. By applying this framework to qualitative empirics from the Medicon Valley life-science cluster, the authors demonstrate the complementarity of globally distributed analytical knowledge creation and locally oriented synthetic knowledge creation. |
| [28] | . Zhongguancun Science Park (ZGC) in Beijing is considered the most innovative region in China. This paper is based on a quantitative survey among ZGC companies that captures the cooperation patterns of the firms. The survey was funded by the German Research Association (DFG). In the process of technological upgrading and innovation, companies in Beijing—as well as in other developing countries—make use of knowledge originating in foreign companies or in universities and public research organizations. The findings presented in this paper confirm that ZGC companies are linked to both sources of knowledge to the same extent. Cooperation with foreign companies helps ZGC companies to get new ideas and to enter the market with new products, whereas cooperation with universities is used mainly to design new products. Thus, the patterns of cooperation show that ZGC can absorb new knowledge from different sources. However, not all of the high-tech companies in ZGC are able to make use of international linkages in the innovation process, as about half of them do not have the necessary capabilities. |
| [29] | . . |
| [30] | . 利用国家重点产业专利信息服务 平台,对长三角装备制造业联合申请发明专利数据进行检索,绘制了长三角地区企业、厂、公司与高校、科研机构之间的产学研创新网络,从节点、部类、城市、区 域等4个层面,采用中心度、网络密度等网络结构指标,对1985~2010年长三角装备制造业产学研创新网络的结构及空间特征进行分析。研究发现,长三角 装备制造业产学研创新网络的演化具有明显的阶段性特征,中心度较高的成员多为高校,区域内各城市的产学研空间分异特征明显,地理邻近、行政邻近及知识规模 邻近是影响行为主体建立创新合作联系重要的因素,网络建构处于初级阶段。 . 利用国家重点产业专利信息服务 平台,对长三角装备制造业联合申请发明专利数据进行检索,绘制了长三角地区企业、厂、公司与高校、科研机构之间的产学研创新网络,从节点、部类、城市、区 域等4个层面,采用中心度、网络密度等网络结构指标,对1985~2010年长三角装备制造业产学研创新网络的结构及空间特征进行分析。研究发现,长三角 装备制造业产学研创新网络的演化具有明显的阶段性特征,中心度较高的成员多为高校,区域内各城市的产学研空间分异特征明显,地理邻近、行政邻近及知识规模 邻近是影响行为主体建立创新合作联系重要的因素,网络建构处于初级阶段。 |
| [31] | . Abstract: In this article, we explore the issue of industrial agglomeration and its relationship to economic development and growth in the less-developed countries of East Asia. We present theoretical arguments and secondary empirical evidence as to why we should have strong expectations about finding a positive relationship between agglomeration and economic performance. We also review evidence from the literature on the roles of formal and informal institutions in East Asian regional economic systems. We then focus specifically on the case of China. We argue that regional development in China has much in common with regional development in other East Asian economies, although there are also important contrasts because of China's history of socialism and its recent trend toward economic liberalization. Through a variety of statistical investigations, we substantiate (in part) the expected positive relationship between agglomeration and economic performance in China. We show that many kinds of manufacturing sectors are characterized by a strong positive relationship between spatial agglomeration and productivity. This phenomenon is especially marked in sectors and regions where liberalization has proceeded rapidly. We consider the relevance of our comments about industrial clustering and economic performance for policy formulation in China and the less-developed countries of East Asia. |
| [32] | . The argument of this paper is that a deeper appreciation of the nature of the power relationships between firms and the circuits of power that bind them together is key to understanding how clusters function 聴 including how they might emerge and how they might decline. We begin to develop a conceptualization that allows us to generate a deeper understanding of the processes that enable the production and reproduction of enterprise clusters under some combinations of circumstances but not others. The sections of the paper explore: (1) concepts of power and circuits of power including their spatialities; (2) the temporarily stabilized relationships which occur in clusters of economic activity; (3) the openness and permeability of clusters as a way of understanding conditions that foster cluster growth; (4) a tentative integration of concepts. From this reading of the concepts of clustering and power we draw the conclusion that clusters are, at any particular point in time, temporary and transient conjunctures of interfirm relationships. They depend on specific circumstances in 聭time聳space聮 and, because of their very transience and specificity, those conditions might be very difficult if not impossible to create through the blunt instruments of policy. |
| [33] | . 随着第三次科技革命的来临与经 济全球化的深入,交通与通信技术日新月异,资源的跨区域流动性空前加大。以大型跨国公司为主导的全球生产网络成为新时期重要的经济现象,不少中小型企业也 将其研发、生产嵌入到全球生产网络之中。受其影响,产业集群的开放性特征越来越明显,资本、技术、人才等创新资源在不同产业集群之间的交流更加频繁,不同 产业集群之间的联系愈来愈密切。不同经济体产业集群之间相互联系成为新时期全球经济空间组织的一道风景线,其对全球经济发展的推动作用越来越大。因此,分 析不同产业集群之间合作的前提条件、合作机制、演化机理等具有重要的理论与应用价值。 论文以导师主持的教育部人文社科基金项目“网络权力与企业空间行为、企业创新”、上海市科技发展基金软科学重点项目“张江建成世界一流高新区的发展思路与 策略研究”、上海张江高科技园区领导小组项目“浦东新区志张江高科技园区卷编制”、上海市政府决策咨询研究项目“构建浦东开放型创新体系研究”、上海张江 集团“张江高科技园区产业发展十大亮点”等研究课题为支撑,在2010年至2013年2月的时间内对张江高科技园区内20多家集成电路企业及上海半导体协 会、上海市集成电路协会、张江集团等部门进行了30多次访谈和调研,为本文顺利完成奠定了扎实的基础。 从网络的空间范围来看,经济地理****比较关注以地方网络为主的产业集群理论和以全球联系为主的全球生产网络两大理论流派。Allen Scott等产业集群论者对产业集群的概念及内涵、组成结构、合作机制、类型、演化机理等内容进行了系统研究。近年来,Harald Bathelt等部分****也开始重视外部联系对于产业集群发展的重要性,关注产业集群外部联系机制及其影响。Peter Dicken等全球生产网络论者则主要分析了全球生产网络的内涵、结构、治理机制、跨国公司与国家制度的相互作用等。然而,无论是新区域主义者提出的产业 集群理论,还是贸易理论演化而来的全球生产网络理论都无法解释位于不同经济体产业集群之间合作的经济空间组织现象,更没有解释这种跨界产业集群之间合作联 系的机理和过程。 本文在借鉴产业集群、全球生产网络理论的基础上,构建了超越产业集群和全球生产网络理论的全新分析框架,系统阐述了跨界产业集群之间合作网络的概念及内 涵、发生机制、前提条件、制约因子、组成结构、合作机制与演化机理等。并在实地调研的基础上,对张江与新竹集成电路产业集群之间合作网络进行了实证分析, 得出结论如下： 第一,跨界产业集群之间合作网络提升了全球资源的整合能力。本文认为跨界产业集群之间合作网络指的是在不同地区具有相互依赖关系的两个产业集群(产业集群 A与产业集群B)通过正式或非正式联系形成的空间组织体系,能够充分利用不同地区优势,更高效地整合创新资源。他们所依托的制度可能相同,也可能差异较 大。跨界产业集群之间合作网络具有地域不连续性、相互依赖性、制度复杂性等特征,由位于不同经济体的两个产业集群和外部通道构成。产业集群包括了企业、研 发机构、大学和中介组织等微观主体、地方网络、及其所依托的制度与文化。外部通道不仅包括网络内产业集群之间的相互联系,而且包括与其他地区的正式或非正 式联系。这种网络组织构架能够充分利用不同产业集群的资源优势,促进产业集群之间分工合作,推动经济整体创新发展。 第二,跨界产业集群之间合作网络具有一定前提条件与制约因子。虽然经济全球化继续深入、产业集群外部性特征越来越明显,但并不是所有的产业集群之间都能形 成跨界产业集群之间合作网络。不同经济体的产业集群之间进行合作需要一定的前提条件,如相似的产业基础、不同的区位条件、大量的FDI、不同的技术等级 等。不同产业集群所依托的制度对于跨界产业集群之间合作网络的作用并不相同。相异的文化会制约跨界产业集群之间合作网络的形成与发展。 第三,网络权力与跨界技术社区推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络演化。组织邻近与关系邻近是不同经济区产业集群相互作用的两种表现方式。具体来说,外部通道分 为FDI、上下游合作、人才跨界流动三种形式,跨界产业集群之间合作网络通过这三种联系形式实现两地资源高效整合与快速创新发展。网络权力、市场等因素通 过推动外部通道的发展促进跨界产业集群之间合作网络形成与发展。在跨界产业集群之间合作网络形成与发展的过程中,制度与文化起着一定的推动或阻碍作用。 根据不同经济体产业集群之间的合作密切程度与外部通道发育情况,跨界产业集群之间合作网络的演化过程可分为孕育、发展、成熟、衰退、消亡或复兴五个阶段。 在孕育期,跨界产业集群之间合作网络中的一个产业集群发展成熟,另一个产业集群刚刚起步；通过企业家异地创业或跨国企业异地建立分支机构,落后区域获得初 步发展,不同经济体产业集群之间初步形成合作联系。进入发展阶段后,外部通道逐渐增多,产业集群A与B内跨国企业之间的联系增多,产业集群之问的跨界合作 更加密切；在跨国企业分支机构网络权力的影响下,后发地区吸引产业集群A内上下游企业进入,推动地方网络逐渐形成,促使产业集群B形成。在成熟阶段,外部 通道不仅包括企业之间的跨界联系,而且包括管理人员、技术人才及核心企业家的人才跨界流动；产业集群B获得快速发展,创新能力迅速提升,通过自主创新能力 培育与产业集群A的技术差距不断缩小,并与产业集群A形成上下游合作联系。产业集群A与B通过正式与非正式合作,推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络走向成熟。 当发生消极锁定、缺乏与外界交流时,跨界产业集群之间合作网络将进入衰退阶段。当网络内技术守门员通过与研发机构、外部技术层级更高的企业合作获得突破性 技术、开发革命性产品、开拓新的市场时,跨界产业集群之间合作网络则步入复兴期。 第四,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络已进入成熟期。从1992年张江高科技园区启动至今,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络共经历了孕 育、发展、成熟三个阶段。在孕育阶段(1992至1999年),受中国大陆改革开放、特别是大陆投资环境和巨大市场的吸引,新竹IC产业集群内的企业家、 资金、人才等创新资源流入张江高科技园区；张江高科技园区IC产业与新竹科学工业园区IC产业技术差距非常大,主要处于全球IC产业的制造和封装领域。在 发展阶段(2000年至2004年),受1999年上海市政府发布“聚焦张江”战略的鼓舞,在台资企业网络权力与大陆市场吸引的作用下,新竹IC产业集群 内IC设计企业跟随进入张江,促使新竹IC产业集群内更多的人才、资金、技术等创新资源进入张江。张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的制造环节在全 球IC产业中占据绝对优势,设计领域也获得一定发展。在成熟阶段(2005年至今),张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间的人才流动更加频繁,上下游跨界合作 联系较为明显,张江与新竹IC产业集群融合发展共同推进两地IC产业发展。在IC制造的带动下,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络IC设计业也获得 快速发展。同时,在技术扩散的作用下,张江与新竹IC产业集群技术差距进一步缩小。 张江高科技园区对外开放制度设计吸引了人才、FDI,推动了张江外部通道的发展,促进了张汀与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的形成与发展；而新竹科学 工业园区限制高端技术及大型投资项目进入中国大陆的政策,阻碍外部通道的发展,从而制约张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的发展。但是,由中介组织 发起的“海峡两岸集成电路产业合作发展论坛”为张江与新竹IC产业集群合作提供了交流合作的管道,在一定程度上抵消了台湾当局设置的制度障碍。这就是说, 张江与新竹同祖同宗的中华文化替代了管理部门,发挥了推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络发展的作用。 . 随着第三次科技革命的来临与经 济全球化的深入,交通与通信技术日新月异,资源的跨区域流动性空前加大。以大型跨国公司为主导的全球生产网络成为新时期重要的经济现象,不少中小型企业也 将其研发、生产嵌入到全球生产网络之中。受其影响,产业集群的开放性特征越来越明显,资本、技术、人才等创新资源在不同产业集群之间的交流更加频繁,不同 产业集群之间的联系愈来愈密切。不同经济体产业集群之间相互联系成为新时期全球经济空间组织的一道风景线,其对全球经济发展的推动作用越来越大。因此,分 析不同产业集群之间合作的前提条件、合作机制、演化机理等具有重要的理论与应用价值。 论文以导师主持的教育部人文社科基金项目“网络权力与企业空间行为、企业创新”、上海市科技发展基金软科学重点项目“张江建成世界一流高新区的发展思路与 策略研究”、上海张江高科技园区领导小组项目“浦东新区志张江高科技园区卷编制”、上海市政府决策咨询研究项目“构建浦东开放型创新体系研究”、上海张江 集团“张江高科技园区产业发展十大亮点”等研究课题为支撑,在2010年至2013年2月的时间内对张江高科技园区内20多家集成电路企业及上海半导体协 会、上海市集成电路协会、张江集团等部门进行了30多次访谈和调研,为本文顺利完成奠定了扎实的基础。 从网络的空间范围来看,经济地理****比较关注以地方网络为主的产业集群理论和以全球联系为主的全球生产网络两大理论流派。Allen Scott等产业集群论者对产业集群的概念及内涵、组成结构、合作机制、类型、演化机理等内容进行了系统研究。近年来,Harald Bathelt等部分****也开始重视外部联系对于产业集群发展的重要性,关注产业集群外部联系机制及其影响。Peter Dicken等全球生产网络论者则主要分析了全球生产网络的内涵、结构、治理机制、跨国公司与国家制度的相互作用等。然而,无论是新区域主义者提出的产业 集群理论,还是贸易理论演化而来的全球生产网络理论都无法解释位于不同经济体产业集群之间合作的经济空间组织现象,更没有解释这种跨界产业集群之间合作联 系的机理和过程。 本文在借鉴产业集群、全球生产网络理论的基础上,构建了超越产业集群和全球生产网络理论的全新分析框架,系统阐述了跨界产业集群之间合作网络的概念及内 涵、发生机制、前提条件、制约因子、组成结构、合作机制与演化机理等。并在实地调研的基础上,对张江与新竹集成电路产业集群之间合作网络进行了实证分析, 得出结论如下： 第一,跨界产业集群之间合作网络提升了全球资源的整合能力。本文认为跨界产业集群之间合作网络指的是在不同地区具有相互依赖关系的两个产业集群(产业集群 A与产业集群B)通过正式或非正式联系形成的空间组织体系,能够充分利用不同地区优势,更高效地整合创新资源。他们所依托的制度可能相同,也可能差异较 大。跨界产业集群之间合作网络具有地域不连续性、相互依赖性、制度复杂性等特征,由位于不同经济体的两个产业集群和外部通道构成。产业集群包括了企业、研 发机构、大学和中介组织等微观主体、地方网络、及其所依托的制度与文化。外部通道不仅包括网络内产业集群之间的相互联系,而且包括与其他地区的正式或非正 式联系。这种网络组织构架能够充分利用不同产业集群的资源优势,促进产业集群之间分工合作,推动经济整体创新发展。 第二,跨界产业集群之间合作网络具有一定前提条件与制约因子。虽然经济全球化继续深入、产业集群外部性特征越来越明显,但并不是所有的产业集群之间都能形 成跨界产业集群之间合作网络。不同经济体的产业集群之间进行合作需要一定的前提条件,如相似的产业基础、不同的区位条件、大量的FDI、不同的技术等级 等。不同产业集群所依托的制度对于跨界产业集群之间合作网络的作用并不相同。相异的文化会制约跨界产业集群之间合作网络的形成与发展。 第三,网络权力与跨界技术社区推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络演化。组织邻近与关系邻近是不同经济区产业集群相互作用的两种表现方式。具体来说,外部通道分 为FDI、上下游合作、人才跨界流动三种形式,跨界产业集群之间合作网络通过这三种联系形式实现两地资源高效整合与快速创新发展。网络权力、市场等因素通 过推动外部通道的发展促进跨界产业集群之间合作网络形成与发展。在跨界产业集群之间合作网络形成与发展的过程中,制度与文化起着一定的推动或阻碍作用。 根据不同经济体产业集群之间的合作密切程度与外部通道发育情况,跨界产业集群之间合作网络的演化过程可分为孕育、发展、成熟、衰退、消亡或复兴五个阶段。 在孕育期,跨界产业集群之间合作网络中的一个产业集群发展成熟,另一个产业集群刚刚起步；通过企业家异地创业或跨国企业异地建立分支机构,落后区域获得初 步发展,不同经济体产业集群之间初步形成合作联系。进入发展阶段后,外部通道逐渐增多,产业集群A与B内跨国企业之间的联系增多,产业集群之问的跨界合作 更加密切；在跨国企业分支机构网络权力的影响下,后发地区吸引产业集群A内上下游企业进入,推动地方网络逐渐形成,促使产业集群B形成。在成熟阶段,外部 通道不仅包括企业之间的跨界联系,而且包括管理人员、技术人才及核心企业家的人才跨界流动；产业集群B获得快速发展,创新能力迅速提升,通过自主创新能力 培育与产业集群A的技术差距不断缩小,并与产业集群A形成上下游合作联系。产业集群A与B通过正式与非正式合作,推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络走向成熟。 当发生消极锁定、缺乏与外界交流时,跨界产业集群之间合作网络将进入衰退阶段。当网络内技术守门员通过与研发机构、外部技术层级更高的企业合作获得突破性 技术、开发革命性产品、开拓新的市场时,跨界产业集群之间合作网络则步入复兴期。 第四,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络已进入成熟期。从1992年张江高科技园区启动至今,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络共经历了孕 育、发展、成熟三个阶段。在孕育阶段(1992至1999年),受中国大陆改革开放、特别是大陆投资环境和巨大市场的吸引,新竹IC产业集群内的企业家、 资金、人才等创新资源流入张江高科技园区；张江高科技园区IC产业与新竹科学工业园区IC产业技术差距非常大,主要处于全球IC产业的制造和封装领域。在 发展阶段(2000年至2004年),受1999年上海市政府发布“聚焦张江”战略的鼓舞,在台资企业网络权力与大陆市场吸引的作用下,新竹IC产业集群 内IC设计企业跟随进入张江,促使新竹IC产业集群内更多的人才、资金、技术等创新资源进入张江。张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的制造环节在全 球IC产业中占据绝对优势,设计领域也获得一定发展。在成熟阶段(2005年至今),张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间的人才流动更加频繁,上下游跨界合作 联系较为明显,张江与新竹IC产业集群融合发展共同推进两地IC产业发展。在IC制造的带动下,张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络IC设计业也获得 快速发展。同时,在技术扩散的作用下,张江与新竹IC产业集群技术差距进一步缩小。 张江高科技园区对外开放制度设计吸引了人才、FDI,推动了张江外部通道的发展,促进了张汀与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的形成与发展；而新竹科学 工业园区限制高端技术及大型投资项目进入中国大陆的政策,阻碍外部通道的发展,从而制约张江与新竹IC跨界产业集群之间合作网络的发展。但是,由中介组织 发起的“海峡两岸集成电路产业合作发展论坛”为张江与新竹IC产业集群合作提供了交流合作的管道,在一定程度上抵消了台湾当局设置的制度障碍。这就是说, 张江与新竹同祖同宗的中华文化替代了管理部门,发挥了推动跨界产业集群之间合作网络发展的作用。 |
| [34] | . No abstract available. |
| [35] | . 目前国际学术界对地理邻近与创新论题的研究囿于静态分析视角。本文从产业集群生命周期视角出发分析地理邻近对集群演化不同阶段创新的动态影响机制,并据此提出理论假说;以我国六大汽车产业集群为研究对象,通过曲线拟合,对集群的动态演化过程进行实证分析,结果表明,目前我国六大汽车产业集群均处在快速成长期,均未到达成熟期;采用动态聚类分析法分别对六大汽车产业集群演化阶段进行划分,不同集群的划分界限不一;在此基础上,建立地理邻近与不同演化阶段集群创新绩效之间的计量模型并进行实证分析,得出以下重要结论:(1)地理邻近对集群演化初期和成长期创新的影响显着为正,成长期的影响效应大于初期;(2)同一演化阶段的不同集群地理邻近影响效应存在显着差异;进而提出针对性政策建议。 . 目前国际学术界对地理邻近与创新论题的研究囿于静态分析视角。本文从产业集群生命周期视角出发分析地理邻近对集群演化不同阶段创新的动态影响机制,并据此提出理论假说;以我国六大汽车产业集群为研究对象,通过曲线拟合,对集群的动态演化过程进行实证分析,结果表明,目前我国六大汽车产业集群均处在快速成长期,均未到达成熟期;采用动态聚类分析法分别对六大汽车产业集群演化阶段进行划分,不同集群的划分界限不一;在此基础上,建立地理邻近与不同演化阶段集群创新绩效之间的计量模型并进行实证分析,得出以下重要结论:(1)地理邻近对集群演化初期和成长期创新的影响显着为正,成长期的影响效应大于初期;(2)同一演化阶段的不同集群地理邻近影响效应存在显着差异;进而提出针对性政策建议。 |
| [36] | . Research on industrial clusters has shifted in a paradigmatic way from an exploration of structural ideal-types toward evolutionary explanations. Thus far, however, networksthe key concept in the former paradigmand evolutionthe focus in the latterremain somewhat unconnected in the literature. This article addresses this gap by developing a comprehensive tri-polar analytical framework of cluster evolution. This framework combines the three concepts of context, network and action, allowing each to evolve in interaction with the others. The empirical analysis applies this framework to the aluminium extrusion industry cluster in Dali, Guangdong province, which has developed over a period of 30 years. Our study finds that with the formation of a new generation of entrepreneurs, previous kinship-based learning networks have disappeared, causing significant changes to action and interaction within and between firms. |
| [37] | . Knowledge spillovers have been considered a major driver for the increased rate of innovation in technological clusters. In this study, we respond to some recen |
| [38] | . This paper reports the results of a 5-year study of eight information and communication technology clusters across Canada. It summarizes the key findings from the individual cases and poses several questions: What are the critical factors that contributed to the emergence and development of the individual clusters in their specific locations? What is the relative importance of local versus non-local factors in supporting the overall dynamism of the clusters? And what are the most important factors that contribute to the ongoing competitiveness of the clusters? In conclusion, it summarizes the import of our findings for the cluster literature in general and sets out the main policy implications. |
| [39] | . |
| [40] | . |
| [41] | . The role of local clusters has been of interest to scholars and policymakers in international business alike. Research found that clusters enable a region to develop faster compared to dispersed economic activity, based mainly on a local concentration of competing and cooperating firms and sophisticated domestic demand. Locating in a cluster has certain benefits for firms stemming from pooling of human capital and supporting institutions varying by industry and international specialization. In this paper, we extend the local view of clusters and emphasize the complementary role of non-local linkages, in particular diasporas, illustrating our model employing the case of the evolution of the Bangalore IT cluster. The novelty of our paper lies in its longitudinal character. We are thereby able to identify how the roles of local and non-local networks differ across life-cycle phases; moreover, we find that diasporas can trigger or accelerate local development. We discuss implications for managers and policy makers. |
| [42] | . <p>本文以河南省虞城县南庄村钢卷尺产业集群为例,基于企业问卷调查数据,运用社会网络分析法,通过对比企业在初创阶段的衍生网络与现阶段的情感网络、咨询网络和合作网络,探讨了欠发达农区传统制造业集群中网络的形成和演化过程。研究发现相对于偏重技术联系的发达地区高技术集群来说,欠发达农区传统制造业集群网络的形成和演化更具有内生性和自组织规律。在集群成长和网络演进的过程中,集群网络中的核心关系受农村社区聚落环境的影响,并随农区企业规模、地位和能力的改变而演变。依此集群网络的形成和演化经历4个阶段,即家族或泛家族网络阶段、内部分工生产网络阶段、本地创新网络阶段和全球供应链网络阶段,各类型网络在集群发展的不同阶段起着不同的作用。</p> . <p>本文以河南省虞城县南庄村钢卷尺产业集群为例,基于企业问卷调查数据,运用社会网络分析法,通过对比企业在初创阶段的衍生网络与现阶段的情感网络、咨询网络和合作网络,探讨了欠发达农区传统制造业集群中网络的形成和演化过程。研究发现相对于偏重技术联系的发达地区高技术集群来说,欠发达农区传统制造业集群网络的形成和演化更具有内生性和自组织规律。在集群成长和网络演进的过程中,集群网络中的核心关系受农村社区聚落环境的影响,并随农区企业规模、地位和能力的改变而演变。依此集群网络的形成和演化经历4个阶段,即家族或泛家族网络阶段、内部分工生产网络阶段、本地创新网络阶段和全球供应链网络阶段,各类型网络在集群发展的不同阶段起着不同的作用。</p> |
| [43] | . The analysis of the importance of different types of regional innovation systems must take place within a context of the actual knowledge base of various industries in the economy, as the innovation processes of firms are strongly shaped by their specific knowledge base. In this paper, we shall distinguish between two types of knowledge base: analytical and synthetic. These types indicate different mixes of tacit and codified knowledge, codification possibilities and limits, qualifications and skills, required organisations and institutions involved, as well as specific competitive challenges from a globalising economy, which have different implications for different sectors of industry, and, thus, for the kind of innovation support needed. The traditional constellation of industrial clusters surrounded by innovation supporting organisations, constituting a regional innovation system, is nearly always to be found in contexts of industries with a synthetic knowledge base (e.g. engineering-based industries), while the existence of regional innovation systems as an integral part of a cluster will normally be the case of industries-based on an analytical knowledge base (e.g. science-based industries, such as IT and bio-tech). In the discussion of different types of regional innovation systems five empirical illustrations from a Nordic comparative project on SMEs and regional innovation systems will be used: the furniture industry in Salling, Denmark; the wireless communication industry in North Jutland, Denmark; the functional food industry in Scania, Sweden; the food industry in Rogaland, Norway and the electronics industry in Horten, Norway. We argue that in terms of innovation policy the regional level often provides a grounded approach embedded in networks of actors acknowledging the importance of the knowledge base of an industry. |
| [44] | The proximity concept is used in many different ways in the literature. These dimensions of proximity are, however, defined and measured in many different (sometimes even contradictory) ways, show large amounts of overlap, and often are under- or over-specified. The goal of this paper is to specify the different dimensions of proximity relevant in inter-organizational collaboration more precisely and to provide definitions of these dimensions. The research presented contributes to reducing the ambiguity of the proximity concept as used in the literature. Based on the above, the following research question is addressed in this paper: `Which dimensions of proximity are relevant in inter-organizational collaboration and how are they defined?' A systematic literature review is presented in order to disentangle the dimensions of the proximity concept. Based on this literature review, three dimensions of proximity relevant in inter-organizational collaboration are distinguished: geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity. Examples (case studies) from the literature are used to illustrate the current conceptual ambiguity as well as to clarify how the proposed dimensions of proximity reduce this conceptual ambiguity. |
| [45] | |
| [46] | . We analyse inter-regional research collaboration as measured by scientific publications and patents with multiple addresses, covering 1316 NUTS3 regions in 29 European countries. The estimates of gravity equations show the effects of geographical and institutional distance on research collaboration. We also find evidence for the existence of elite structures between excellence regions and between capital regions. The results suggest that current EU science policy to stimulate research collaboration is legitimate, but doubt the compatibility between EU science policy and EU cohesion policy. |
| [47] | By Stefano Breschi and Francesco Lissoni; Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: an anatomy of localized knowledge flows |
| [48] | . We contend that two important, nonrelational, features of formal interorganizational networks---geographic propinquity and organizational form---fundamentally alter the flow of information through a network. Within regional economies, contractual linkages among physically proximate organizations represent relatively transparent channels for information transfer because they are embedded in an ecology rich in informal and labor market transmission mechanisms. Similarly, we argue that the spillovers that result from proprietary alliances are a function of the institutional commitments and practices of members of the network. When the dominant nodes in an innovation network are committed to open regimes of information disclosure, the entire structure is characterized by less tightly monitored ties. The relative accessibility of knowledge transferred through contractual linkages to organizations determines whether innovation benefits accrue broadly to membership in a coherent network component or narrowly to centrality. We draw on novel network visualization methods and conditional fixed effects negative binomial regressions to test these arguments for human therapeutic biotechnology firms located in the Boston metropolitan area. |
| [49] | . In economic geographic analysis, the 'firm' usually is assumed, at least implicitly, as a coherent and unitary economic actor. More recently, however, the integrity of the firm as the basic analytical unit has been undercut by organizational practices which are built instead around 'projects'. By taking up this theoretical challenge, this paper ventures an empirical investigation in which the project features as the central unit of economic action. However, rather than assuming a substitution of the firm by temporary projects, the paper seeks to explore interdependencies between projects and firms as well as other more traditional 'permanent forms' of organization. Against the empirical background of the London advertising industry, the paper delves into the interrelation between projects on the one hand and, on the other, the agencies, personal ties, localities and corporate networks which provide essential sources for project-based organizing. By consecutively embedding projects into these different organizational and social layers, the paper unfolds a space of collaborative practices for which the term project ecology will be proposed. D'habitude dans l'analyse économico-géographique, on suppose, du moins implicitement, que 'l'entreprise' constitue un agent économique cohérent et unitaire. Toujours est-il que, plus récemment, l'intégritéde l'entrepise comme outil de base analytique a été sapée par des pratiques organisationnelles fondées plut00t sur la notion de 'projets'. En relevant ce défi théorique, cet article cherche à fournir un examen empirique dans lequel le projet existe comme l'unité centrale des mesures économiques prises. Cependant, au lieu de supposer la substitution des projets temporaires à l'entreprise, l'article cherche à examiner les interdépendances entre des projets et des entreprises aussi bien que des 'formes permanentes' d'organisation plus traditionnelles. Sur le fond empirique de la publicité à Londres, l'article examine la corrélation entre, d'un c00té, les projets et, de l'autre c00té, les agences, les liens personnels, les endroits et les réseaux d'entreprise qui constituent des sources essentielles d'organisation fondée sur la notion de projets. En ancrant consécutivement des projets dans ces différentes couches organisationnelles et sociales, l'article dévoile un espace de pratiques en collaboration appellé l'écologie de projet . In (wirtschafts-)geographischen Untersuchungen wird das 'Unternehmen' in der Regel, zumindest implizit, als koh01renter und einheitlicher 02konomischer Akteur begriffen. Diese analytische Integrit01t des Unternehmens als Grundeinheit wissenschaftlicher Untersuchung wird in jüngerer Zeit allerdings durch organisatorische Praktiken in Frage gestellt, deren zentraler Bezugspunkt nicht das Unternehmen sondern das 'Projekt' darstellt. Anstatt allerdings von einer Substitution des 'permanenten' Unternehmens durch 'tempor01re' Projekte auszugehen, interessiert sich dieses Papier vor allem für die Interdependenzen zwischen Projekten und Unternehmen sowie anderen permanenten Organisationsformen. Vor dem empirischen Hintergrund der Londoner Werbeindustrie analysiert dieses Papier die organisationalen und sozialen Beziehungen zwischen Projekten einerseits, den Unternehmen, pers02nlichen Netzwerken, dem lokalen Milieu und den übergeordneten Unternehmensverflechtungen andrerseits. In dem Projekte aufeinander abfolgend in diese unterschiedlichen Kontexte eingebettet werden, umreisst dieses Papier die Konturen des organisationalen und physischen Raumes, in dem sich die tempor01re Kooperation in Projekten entfaltet. In Abgrenzung von mehr etablierten wirtschaftsgeographischen Begriffen wie Industrial District, innovatives Milieu oder regionales lnnovationssystem wird für diesen Raum tempor01rer Projektkooperation der Begriff Projekt02kologie vorgeschlagen. |
| [50] | . 文章着重于地方、跨区以及全球 尺度对创新网络的研究,结合外部联系的构建方式,讨论不同类型的行为主体的创新结网特征。以山东省东营市石油装备制造业为例,在对集群企业深度访谈和问卷 调查的基础上,观察东营市及其石油装备制造业创新网络的结构及空间特征。研究发现,对于内生型产业集群而言,广阔、多元化的关系资本是本地创新网络的重要 特征;基于组织关系的合作在区域、全球尺度中居于主导地位,创新链接以经济关系和知识关系为主。 . 文章着重于地方、跨区以及全球 尺度对创新网络的研究,结合外部联系的构建方式,讨论不同类型的行为主体的创新结网特征。以山东省东营市石油装备制造业为例,在对集群企业深度访谈和问卷 调查的基础上,观察东营市及其石油装备制造业创新网络的结构及空间特征。研究发现,对于内生型产业集群而言,广阔、多元化的关系资本是本地创新网络的重要 特征;基于组织关系的合作在区域、全球尺度中居于主导地位,创新链接以经济关系和知识关系为主。 |
| [51] | . ABSTRACT An evolutionary perspective on economic geography requires a dynamic understanding of change in networks. This paper explores theories of network evolution for their use in geography and develops the conceptual framework of geographical network trajectories. It specifically assesses how tie selection constitutes the evolutionary process of retention and variation in network structure and how geography affects these mechanisms. Finally, a typology of regional network formations is used to discuss opportunities for innovation in and across regions. |
| [52] | The innovative performance of companies has been studied quite extensively and for a long period of time. However, the results of many studies have not yet led to a generally accepted indicator of innovative performance or a common set of indicators. So far the variety in terms of constructs, measurements, samples, industries and countries has been substantial. This paper studies the innovative performance of a large international sample of nearly 1200 companies in four high-tech industries, using a variety of indicators. These indicators range from R&D inputs, patent counts and patent citations to new product announcements. The study establishes that a composite construct based on these four indicators clearly catches a latent variable ‘innovative performance’. However, our findings also suggest that the statistical overlap between these indicators is that strong that future research might also consider using any of these indicators to measure the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. |
| [53] | . |
| [54] | . An abstract is not available. |
| [55] | . Theories of localized knowledge exchange argue that proximity among economic agents in spatial clusters fosters invention and innovation. An alternative perspective stresses interregional collaborative networks in which individuals and groups are embedded in wide-ranging webs of relationships. This article uses social network analysis to explore the changing structures of collaborative systems of intermetropolitan co-patenting in American biotechnology from 1979 to 2009. Results show that intermetropolitan network complexity has broadened and deepened. While inventors in major centers are the foremost collaborators, a dense web of knowledge exchange has emerged that is not singularly controlled by a handful of intermediaries. National linkages have developed, but intense local and regional ties persist. Inventive centrality, magnitude, and patent intensity significantly correlate. Inventors in small areas are obliged to substitute intermetropolitan networks for thin agglomerative economies. An estimate is proposed of the size of biotechnology centers needed to generate agglomerative economies. The system approximates a core-periphery structure with core metropolitan areas strongly tied to one another and to peripheral areas. City systems theory and associated American empirical analyses help interpret results. |
| [56] | . Based on the patent co-authorship data from State Intellectual Property Office of China, this paper examines the evolution of small world network and its impact on patent productivity in China. Compared with the western countries, the small-world phenomenon of the innovation network in China is becoming more obvious. Empirical result shows that the small world network may only have significant impact on patent productivity in those patent productive provinces, e.g., Beijing and Guangdong that filed larger number of patents. Although the collaborations in the network are more endurable in China than ones in western countries, it may be less efficient in transmitting knowledge because of large ratio of administration oriented state owned enterprises (SOEs). With larger ratio of SOEs, the small world network has longer path length and knowledge thus flows less efficiently in Beijing than in Guangdong. The policy implication of the findings lies in that the Chinese government should let the market rather than the administration determine the collaboration of technological innovation, in order to encourage innovation and establish an effective small world network for speeding up flow of knowledge among different type of firms during the innovative process. |
| [57] | . Existing theoretical attempts to understand the dynamics of technological innovation have focused on the influence of regional environment and inter-firm relations. More recently, however, a number of studies have suggested that firm-specific attributes be taken as the key to innovation. This study examines the determinants of technological innovation in China's ICT firms based on a large-scale questionnaire survey. We reveal that firm-level attributes are of great importance to innovation whereas the influences of region/relation-specific factors are modified by the types of innovation and by firms' strategies and motivations. The role of regional and relational assets should not be over-emphasized at the expense of firm-level attributes. Research emphasis should be placed on the process of how firm attributes interacted with regional environment and inter-firm relations to shape innovation. The article concludes with a plea to bring 鈥榯he firm' back to the center and adopt an interactionist approach to understanding technological innovation. |
| [58] | . ABSTRACT In this paper, we study the formation of network ties between firms along the life cycle of a creative industry. We focus on three drivers of network formation: i) network endogeneity which stresses a path-dependent change originating from previous network structures, ii) five forms of proximity (e.g. geographical proximity) which ascribe tie formation to the similarity of actors' attributes; and (iii) individual characteristics which refer to the heterogeneity in actors capabilities to exploit external knowledge. The paper employs a stochastic actor-oriented model to estimate the - changing - effects of these drivers on inter-firm network formation in the global video game industry from 1987 to 2007. Our findings indicate that the effects of the drivers of network formation change with the degree of maturity of the industry. To an increasing extent, video game firms tend to partner over shorter distances and with more cognitively similar firms as the industry evolves. |
| [59] | 介绍了区域知识竞争力的评价模型，它建立在新的人力资本理论和经济增长的内生模型基础上．根据该模型对世界主要区域知识竞争力的评价结果，比较分析了上海在知识竞争力方面的整体表现和结构问题，揭示了其创新系统“短板”． 介绍了区域知识竞争力的评价模型，它建立在新的人力资本理论和经济增长的内生模型基础上．根据该模型对世界主要区域知识竞争力的评价结果，比较分析了上海在知识竞争力方面的整体表现和结构问题，揭示了其创新系统“短板”． |
| [60] | . We investigate evidence for spatially mediated knowledge transfer from university research. We examine whether firms locate R&D near universities, and whether those that do are more likely to co-operate with, or source knowledge from them. We find that pharmaceutical firms locate R&D near to frontier chemistry research departments, consistent with accessing localized knowledge spillovers, but also linked to the presence of science parks. Chemicals R&D exhibits co-location with materials science departments, with firms within 10 km more likely to directly engage with universities. In other industries we find less, or no evidence of co-location with university research. |
| [61] | . |
| [62] | . This paper examines a number of forces that have possibly contributed to the explosive growth of Chinese patenting over the past decade. After a review of previous hypotheses and conventional wisdom, this study proposes an additional explanation and argues that patent subsidy programs implemented by each provincial region have played an important role in the growth of Chinese patenting. This institutional change, taking place at the province-level, has induced an increase in patent propensity among not only firms, universities, and research institutes, but also individuals. Empirical evidence based on publicly available data provides solid support for this argument. It was also found that a larger fraction of applications are granted patent rights since the implementation of such programs, suggesting that reduction in patent application quality may not be a serious concern, unless the criteria used for patent examination have been lowered. |
| [63] | . |
| [64] | . |
| [65] | . <h2 class="secHeading" id="section_abstract">Abstract</h2><p id="">University knowledge transfer, which contains both codified and non-codified knowledge, is an important source of industry innovativeness. The geographic constraint on university knowledge flows, which is commonly observed in Western countries, makes proximity with universities a big plus in creating learning regions. No systematic study has been conducted in China regarding such geographic constraint on knowledge transfer and its implications on China's nation and regional innovation systems. Taking advantage of the Chinese patent data, this paper examines the geographic variations in university–industry collaborations in China from 1985 to 2004 and shows a decentralizing/localizing trend in knowledge flows from university to industry. The blockmodel analysis further reveals the roles of different provinces and municipalities in the National Innovation System and how those had changed over time. Besides showing a vivid picture of the knowledge exchange patterns among Chinese provinces and municipalities, the results suggest that the geographic constraint on knowledge flows only becomes salient in China in recent years due to the administrative decentralization and the economic reform. As a result of these changes, less favored regions are further left behind not only due to their shortage of local university resources, but also because of the reduced extra-local knowledge support, which constitutes an important supplemental resource for regional development.</p> |
| [66] | . Chinese scientific output has increased dramatically in recent years, but its internal spatial structure has received scant attention. Estimated gravity models of intercity scientific coauthorships show that there are two types of spatial political bias in China, apart from the expected mass and distance effects. Intercity coauthorships involving Beijing are more common than Beijing's output volume and location would imply, and this Beijing bias is increasing over time. The second type of spatial political bias is greater intraprovincial collaboration than is accounted for by size and distance. The geography of Chinese science is thus not only monocentric as regards overall scientific output, but also exhibits unusually hierarchical collaboration patterns. Unlike in Europe and North America, national and regional capitals are becoming ever more important as scientific coordination centers. |
| [67] | . <p>借鉴国内外相关研究,遵从科学性、系统性、动态性和可操作性原则,针对我国区域经济特点,从规模、市场、效率、成长、结构和创新6方面选取11个指标构建我国地区制造业竞争力评价指标体系,以省区为单位,从宏观层面划分我国地区制造业竞争力类型,旨在对不同类型区制造业竞争力的提升提供理论依据。研究表明:根据竞争力综合指数,1985年和2003年我国各省区制造业竞争力均可划分为最强、较强、一般、较弱和最弱五类;结合近20年来各省(市、区)制造业综合竞争力在全国的位次变化,可将其划分为高水平稳定型、较高水平波动型、低水平波动型和较低水平振动型四类;根据竞争力内部结构,可将其划分为绝对市场主导型、强创新弱市场型、规模-成长主导型、结构基本均衡型和结构特殊不均衡型五类。</p> . <p>借鉴国内外相关研究,遵从科学性、系统性、动态性和可操作性原则,针对我国区域经济特点,从规模、市场、效率、成长、结构和创新6方面选取11个指标构建我国地区制造业竞争力评价指标体系,以省区为单位,从宏观层面划分我国地区制造业竞争力类型,旨在对不同类型区制造业竞争力的提升提供理论依据。研究表明:根据竞争力综合指数,1985年和2003年我国各省区制造业竞争力均可划分为最强、较强、一般、较弱和最弱五类;结合近20年来各省(市、区)制造业综合竞争力在全国的位次变化,可将其划分为高水平稳定型、较高水平波动型、低水平波动型和较低水平振动型四类;根据竞争力内部结构,可将其划分为绝对市场主导型、强创新弱市场型、规模-成长主导型、结构基本均衡型和结构特殊不均衡型五类。</p> |
| [68] | . <p>知识在产业集聚、区域创新中的地位越来越突出,城市知识储量及其在区域知识网络中的地位对城市的综合竞争力有重要影响。学术论文合作与专利合作是知识溢出的体现形式,是科学和技术发展的重要成果,也是度量区域创新能力的主要指标。以2000-2009年中国生物技术领域合著论文和共同申请专利的信息为原始数据,分别构建中国城市间科学知识网络(scientific knowledge network,SKN)与技术知识网络(technological knowledge network,TKN)。运用复杂网络与地学空间分析方法,从整体网络结构特征、择优链接性、中心城市及其自我网络的空间特征等方面进行分析,探究知识溢出的时空复杂性。研究表明：①SKN和TKN具有无标度网络特征;SKN节点度数的异质性高于TKN。②两种网络均呈异配性,即城市选择合作对象存在明显择优链接性,知识溢出具有粘着性和空间依赖性。③SKN中心城市具有明显的等级结构,空间分布总体呈“大分散小集聚”特点;TKN中心城市层级结构不明显,尚未形成明显极化中心。④SKN中心城市自我网络的合作空间,由最初的沿海省会城市间的合作转向长三角、珠三角、京津冀等区域间和沿海城市与内陆城市间的合作,区域间知识溢出明显;TKN中心城市自我网络仍多分布于沿海城市和少数中西部省会城市,区域间知识溢出不明显。⑤SKN中心城市及其自我网络的时空演变存在等级扩散和传染扩散的现象,符合时空梯度推移规律,且空间等级梯度逐渐向扁平化转变;TKN中心城市及其自我网络的时空演变以等级扩散为主,时空梯度推移现象不明显。研究结论为量化知识溢出及知识溢出网络结构的时空演化过程提供新的研究视角,对城市创新政策的制定有一定借鉴意义。</p> . <p>知识在产业集聚、区域创新中的地位越来越突出,城市知识储量及其在区域知识网络中的地位对城市的综合竞争力有重要影响。学术论文合作与专利合作是知识溢出的体现形式,是科学和技术发展的重要成果,也是度量区域创新能力的主要指标。以2000-2009年中国生物技术领域合著论文和共同申请专利的信息为原始数据,分别构建中国城市间科学知识网络(scientific knowledge network,SKN)与技术知识网络(technological knowledge network,TKN)。运用复杂网络与地学空间分析方法,从整体网络结构特征、择优链接性、中心城市及其自我网络的空间特征等方面进行分析,探究知识溢出的时空复杂性。研究表明：①SKN和TKN具有无标度网络特征;SKN节点度数的异质性高于TKN。②两种网络均呈异配性,即城市选择合作对象存在明显择优链接性,知识溢出具有粘着性和空间依赖性。③SKN中心城市具有明显的等级结构,空间分布总体呈“大分散小集聚”特点;TKN中心城市层级结构不明显,尚未形成明显极化中心。④SKN中心城市自我网络的合作空间,由最初的沿海省会城市间的合作转向长三角、珠三角、京津冀等区域间和沿海城市与内陆城市间的合作,区域间知识溢出明显;TKN中心城市自我网络仍多分布于沿海城市和少数中西部省会城市,区域间知识溢出不明显。⑤SKN中心城市及其自我网络的时空演变存在等级扩散和传染扩散的现象,符合时空梯度推移规律,且空间等级梯度逐渐向扁平化转变;TKN中心城市及其自我网络的时空演变以等级扩散为主,时空梯度推移现象不明显。研究结论为量化知识溢出及知识溢出网络结构的时空演化过程提供新的研究视角,对城市创新政策的制定有一定借鉴意义。</p> |
| [69] | . <p>基于问卷、访谈及统计数据资料,采用因子分析、数学建模等综合分析方法,以知识经济下城市创新职能及城市体系理论为理论基础,探讨中国城市的创新格局、网络、等级体系及城市的创新联系,研究表明,中国创新城市体系空间格局形成以上海、北京为顶级城市的五级塔型城市体系结构,东部沿海城市在中国创新城市中具有重要地位,省会城市及经济强劲的城市一般成为区域性的创新中心。中国创新城市体系受城市创新规模、城市科研规模与效率、城市创新潜力因素、城市创新环境等多方面因素的影响。以城市间合作论文数量来测度城市之间的创新联系,结果表明,北京在知识传播和知识合作创新中的处于中心位置,高层级的城市在知识传播与合作中明显比较高层级与中层级以及低层级城市多,省会城市及经济实力强劲的区域中心城市在知识传播中起重要的作用。</p> . <p>基于问卷、访谈及统计数据资料,采用因子分析、数学建模等综合分析方法,以知识经济下城市创新职能及城市体系理论为理论基础,探讨中国城市的创新格局、网络、等级体系及城市的创新联系,研究表明,中国创新城市体系空间格局形成以上海、北京为顶级城市的五级塔型城市体系结构,东部沿海城市在中国创新城市中具有重要地位,省会城市及经济强劲的城市一般成为区域性的创新中心。中国创新城市体系受城市创新规模、城市科研规模与效率、城市创新潜力因素、城市创新环境等多方面因素的影响。以城市间合作论文数量来测度城市之间的创新联系,结果表明,北京在知识传播和知识合作创新中的处于中心位置,高层级的城市在知识传播与合作中明显比较高层级与中层级以及低层级城市多,省会城市及经济实力强劲的区域中心城市在知识传播中起重要的作用。</p> |
| [70] | . 基于探索性空间数据分析和验证性空间面板模型,本文探讨了2000 年以来中国区域创新的时空动态。结果表明:① 自创新战略实施以来,中国各省区创新产出的年均增长率几乎都经历了一个剧烈的加速过程,说明区域创新能力的总体提升,但是,东部沿海地区仍然在创新产出中居于压倒性地位,导致“沿海—内陆”分化加剧和区域鸿沟的进一步突出,省区创新可能会陷入“强者愈强,弱者愈弱”的“马太效应”;② 中国区域创新产出与创新投入的空间集聚随时间推移不断强化,通过识别不同时期各变量“热点”,表明创新产出“热点”地区与创新投入“热点”具有高度的时空耦合特征;③ 人均GDP、研发投入、研发人员及在校大学生数对省区创新产出有显著的直接影响。省区间创新活动存在明显的空间溢出效应,其知识溢出的地理区域跨越了省区边界。空间依赖性的存在导致省区间创新活动具有反馈效应,相邻省区的知识溢出对该省区的创新活动具有实质性影响。 . 基于探索性空间数据分析和验证性空间面板模型,本文探讨了2000 年以来中国区域创新的时空动态。结果表明:① 自创新战略实施以来,中国各省区创新产出的年均增长率几乎都经历了一个剧烈的加速过程,说明区域创新能力的总体提升,但是,东部沿海地区仍然在创新产出中居于压倒性地位,导致“沿海—内陆”分化加剧和区域鸿沟的进一步突出,省区创新可能会陷入“强者愈强,弱者愈弱”的“马太效应”;② 中国区域创新产出与创新投入的空间集聚随时间推移不断强化,通过识别不同时期各变量“热点”,表明创新产出“热点”地区与创新投入“热点”具有高度的时空耦合特征;③ 人均GDP、研发投入、研发人员及在校大学生数对省区创新产出有显著的直接影响。省区间创新活动存在明显的空间溢出效应,其知识溢出的地理区域跨越了省区边界。空间依赖性的存在导致省区间创新活动具有反馈效应,相邻省区的知识溢出对该省区的创新活动具有实质性影响。 |
| [71] | . ABSTRACT This paper analyses the spatial configurations of knowledge networks and their overlap with spatial concentrations, such as urban agglomerations. It proposes a typology of spatial concentrations in knowledge networks, and uses data from academic coauthorships in the field of optical technology and complex network analysis to show how China’s regions and research organisations are located in national and international knowledge exchanges. This spatial representation and analysis of a large-scale knowledge network provide an enhanced view of the quality of network structures. Access to different pools of knowledge is unevenly distributed, allowing some regions to combine knowledge and create learning opportunities that do not stem from a spatial concentration of activity in science, but rather from their positions in the network. |
| [72] | . Abstract<br/>China’s economy and technology have experienced spectacular growth since the Opening-up Policy adopted in 1978. In order to explore the innovation process and development of China, this study examines the inventive activities and the collaboration pattern of university, industry and government (UIG) in China. This study analyzes the Chinese patent data retrieved from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Three models of UIG relations which represent different triple helix configurations are introduced. According to the property of patent assignee, patent ownership can be divided into three types: individuals, enterprises, and universities and research institutes. Furthermore, enterprises can be classified into state-owned enterprise (SOE), private-owned enterprise (POE) and foreign enterprise (FE). The corresponding relationship of patent ownership with UIG is set up. Through analyzing the issued year, it is found that the inventive activities of China have experienced three developmental phases and have been promoted quickly in recent years. The achievement of innovation activities in China primarily falls on the enterprise, especially FEs and POEs. The innovation strengths of the three development phases have shifted from government to university and research institute and then industry. According to co-patent analysis, it is found that the collaboration between university and industry is the strongest and has been intensified in recent years, but other forms of collaboration among UIG have been weak. In addition, an innovation relation model of China was set up. The evolution process of innovation systems was explored, from etatistic model, followed by improved “laissez-faire” model, and then shifting toward triple helix model.<br/> |
| [73] | . SCHERNGELL T. and HU Y. Collaborative knowledge production in China: regional evidence from a gravity model approach, Regional Studies. This study investigates collaborative knowledge production in China from a regional perspective. The objective is to illustrate spatial patterns of research collaborations between thirty-one Chinese regions, and to estimate the impact of geographical, technological, and economic factors on the variation of cross-region collaboration activities within a negative binomial gravity model framework. Data are used on Chinese scientific publications from 2007 with multiple author addresses coming from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. The results provide evidence that geographical space impedes cross-region research collaborations in China. Technological proximity matters more than geography, while economic effects only play a minor role. |
| [74] | . |
