政府结构化人才引进政策能否促进企业创新

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究中国政府如何制定合宜的人才引进政策促进企业创新，对政府在“十四五”时期推动地区经济高质量发展意义重大。文章借鉴吸收能力理论、“威廉姆森”假说以及一般均衡模型构建城市（产业）内部“集聚”型和“逆集聚”型人才结构识别标准，并且结合较为合宜的工具变量基于人才结构视角使用两阶段最小二乘法研究政府结构化人才引进政策如何影响企业创新。结果表明，相对于以人才数量为目标导向的人才引进政策，政府结构化人才引进政策引导高级劳动力要素在企业间进行“逆集聚”分布更有利于企业创新，并且在城市（产业）内部构建“逆集聚”型人才结构是政府结构化人才引进政策促进企业创新的重要机制之一，解释效力约为60.42%。此外，创新要素结构的联动变化也是政府结构化人才引进政策促进企业创新的重要机制之一，解释效力约为23.99%。“十四五”时期政府应调整以人才数量为目标导向的人才引进政策，实施结构化人才引进政策引导高级劳动力要素在城市（产业）内部形成“逆集聚”型人才结构以促进企业创新。

关键词: 人才政策, 人才结构, 企业创新, 高级劳动力要素, 两阶段最小二乘法

Abstract: Since China joined the WTO in 2001, Chinese enterprises have participated in global competition with the help of low-cost labor factors, which forms an extrusion effect on high-level labor factors and makes it difficult for enterprise innovation. Therefore, studying how the Chinese government has formulated appropriate talent policies to ensure that high-level labor factors make an effective agglomeration form for enterprise innovation is of great significance for the high-quality development of regional economy during the 14th Five-Year period of China. However, many literatures focus on the government talent policies oriented by talent quantity to study "talent contest" cities how to affect enterprise innovation, and ignore the key question whether the government talent policies oriented by talent structure can effectively make enterprise innovative development. If this problem is not solved, it will be difficult for the government to formulate appropriate talent policies to ensure enterprise innovative development. Therefore, our paper studies the influence of the government structural talent policies on enterprise innovation and its mechanism.This paper has several intersecting contributions to extant literature, the first of which relates to our novel identification standard of innovative factor structure. On one hand, drawing on the core ideas of the absorptive capacity theory, Williamson hypothesis and general equilibrium theory, our paper designs an identification standard of "agglomeration" and "reverse agglomeration" talent structure within the same city (industry) and studies the government structural talent policies how to affect enterprise innovation. On the other hand, we construct an identification standard of innovation structure within the same city (industry), and find that the linkage effect of talent structure and innovation structure is also one of the important mechanisms by which the positive effect of government structural talent policies on enterprise innovation. Secondly, we design some appropriate tool variables and conduct comparative analysis with a variety of databases and empirical methods to ensure the conclusion more reliable. Extant literatures pay insufficient attention to the possible endogenous problems within the empirical model. On the contrary, our paper uses the two-stage least square method combined with appropriate instrumental variables to make empirical analysis. In addition, we also construct an identification standard of "talent contest" cities dominated by "agglomeration" or "reverse agglomeration" talent structure, and carry out many empirical tests from multiple angles to verify the existence of our hypothesis. Thirdly, we forge new scholarly paths into the literature based on our research object. We design an analysis framework with the linkage change between talent structure and innovation structure as the main content, and put forward that the linkage effect of innovative factor structure is the core mechanisms by which the positive effect of government structural talent policies on enterprise innovation. Empirical analysis results show that the government talent policies oriented by talent quantity form an unreasonable talent structure ("agglomeration" structure) within the same city (industry), and the government structural talent policies are more beneficial for enterprise innovation than that of the talent policies oriented by the talent quantity. Firstly, the government talent policies oriented by talent quantity are not beneficial for enterprise innovation. The government talent policies oriented by talent quantity lead to excessive agglomeration of high-level labor factors in a few leading enterprises within the same city (industry) and form an "agglomeration" talent structure, which is not beneficial for enterprise innovation. Secondly, the government structural talent policies are beneficial for enterprise innovation. The government structural talent policies make a uniform distribution layout of high-level labor factors among enterprises within the same city (industry) and form a "reverse agglomeration" talent structure, which is beneficial for enterprise innovation. Thirdly, the innovative factor structure is an important mechanism by which the influence of government structural talent policies on enterprise innovation. One hand, the "reverse agglomeration" talent structure among enterprises within the same city (industry) is one of the important mechanisms by which the positive effect of government structural talent policies on enterprise innovation, with an explanatory effect of roughly 60.42%. The other hand, the linkage effect of "reverse agglomeration" talent structure and "NN" type innovative structure is also one of the important mechanisms, with an explanatory effect of roughly 23.99%. Our paper suggests that the government should put into the structured talent policies oriented by talent structure through the government "visible hand", and finally make enterprise innovative development. Specific suggestions are as follows. Firstly, the government should adjust talent policies oriented by talent quantity, and make enterprise innovative development through the structural talent policies, especially for the provincial and sub provincial cities. As for incremental talents, talent policies should make a uniform distribution layout of incremental high-level labor factors. As for stock talents, talent policies should transfer high-level labor factors from leading enterprises with excessive high-level labor factors to other enterprises with insufficient high-level labor factors for making a "reverse agglomeration" talent structure within the same city (industry). Secondly, as for a complete set of structural talent policies. One hand, the government should improve the software and hardware facilities to make talents independent and orderly flow. For example, the government should speed up the regional high-speed railway network construction to accelerate the high-level labor factors independent and orderly flow and reduce the talent gap among enterprises within the same city (industry). The other hand, the government should adjust industrial policies to form an "NN" type innovative structure within the same city (industry), as to coordinate the structural talent policies to jointly make enterprise innovative development.

Key words: talent policy, talent structure, enterprise innovation, high-level labor factor, two stage least square (2SLS) model

孙文浩. 政府结构化人才引进政策能否促进企业创新[J]. 科研管理, 2023, 44(4): 164-174.

Sun Wenhao. Can structural talent introduction policies promote innovation of enterprises?[J]. Science Research Management, 2023, 44(4): 164-174.

参考文献

参考文献
[1] 李静，楠玉. 人才为何流向公共部门——减速期经济稳增长困境及人力资本错配含义[J]. 财贸经济, 2019(2): 20-33.
[2] 李静，楠玉. 人力资本错配下的决策:优先创新驱动还是优先产业升级?[J]. 经济研究, 2019, 54(8): 152-166.
[3] 李静，楠玉，刘霞辉. 中国经济稳增长难题：人力资本错配及其解决途径[J]. 经济研究, 2017(3): 18-31.
[4] 马茹，张静，王宏伟. 科技人才促进中国经济高质量发展了吗?——基于科技人才对全要素生产率增长效应的实证检验[J]. 经济与管理研究, 2019, 40(5): 3-12.
[5] 倪渊，张健. 科技人才激励政策感知、工作价值观与创新投入[J]. 科学学研究, 2021, 39(4): 632-643.
[6] 孙文浩，张益丰. 城市抢“人”大战有利于地区新旧动能转换吗?[J]. 科学学研究, 2019, 37(7): 1220-1230.
[7] 吴婷，易明. 人才的资源匹配、技术效率与经济高质量发展[J]. 科学学研究, 2019, 37(11): 1955-1963.
[8] 张岩，吴芳. “抢人”政策对高新技术企业市场价值的影响[J/OL]. 科研管理. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1567.G3.20211008.2052.038.html
[9] 孙文浩，张杰. 收敛还是发散:企业创新的规模“陷阱”[J]. 科研管理, 2021, 42(4): 92-102.
[10] AGHION P, BLOOM N, BLUNDELL R, et al. Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2005, 120(2): 701-728.
[11] BOSETTI V, CATTANEO C, VERDOLINI E. Migration of skilled workers and innovation: A European perspective[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2015, 96(2): 311-322.
[12] GIULIANI E. Cluster absorptive capacity: Why do some clusters forge ahead and others lag behind?[J]. European Urban and Regional Studies, 2005, 12(3): 269-288.
[13] 田喜洲，郭新宇，杨光坤. 要素集聚对高技术产业创新能力发展的影响研究[J]. 科研管理, 2021, 42(9): 61-70.
[14] ZENG J, LIU Y, WANG R, et al. Absorptive capacity and regional innovation in China: An analysis of patent applications, 2000–2015[J]. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy, 2019, 12(2): 1031-1049.
[15] 孙文杰，沈坤荣. 人力资本积累与中国制造业技术创新效率的差异性[J]. 中国工业经济, 2009(3): 81-91.
[16] GLAESER E L, MING L. Human-capital externalities in China[J]. NBER Working Papers, 2018.
[17] CHE Y, ZHANG L. Human capital, technology adoption and firm performance: Impacts of China's higher education expansion in the late 1990s [J]. The Economic Journal, 2018, 128(614): 2282-2320.
[18] KWAN L Y Y, CHIU C Y. Country variations in different innovation outputs: The interactive effect of institutional support and human capital[J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2015, 36(7): 1050-1070.
[19] BARTELSMANN E, DOBBELAERE S, PETERS B. Allocation of human capital and innovation at the frontier: Firm-level evidence on Germany and the Netherlands[J]. Zew Discussion Papers, 2014, 24(5): 875-949.
[20] 张萃. 外来人力资本、文化多样性与中国城市创新[J]. 世界经济, 2019, 42(11): 172-192.
[21] WILLIAMSON J G. Regional inequality and the process of national development: A description of patterns[J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1965, 13(4): 3-47.
[22] 孙文浩. 城市抢“人”大战与企业创新[J]. 山西财经大学学报, 2020, 42(9): 15-30.
[23] 邵宜航，徐菁. 高等教育扩张的增长效应:人力资本提升还是信号干扰[J]. 财贸经济, 2017(11): 5-22.
[24] 韦铁，鲁若愚. 技术外溢条件下企业自主创新投入问题研究[J]. 管理工程学报, 2011, 25(1): 83-87.
[25] HASHMI A R. Competition and innovation: The inverted-U relationship revisited[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2013, 95(5): 1653-1668.
[26] 张杰，郑文平，翟福昕. 竞争如何影响创新:中国情景的新检验[J]. 中国工业经济, 2014(11): 56-68.
[27] 王春杨，兰宗敏，张超，等. 高铁建设、人力资本迁移与区域创新[J]. 中国工业经济, 2020(12): 102-120.
[28] 孙洁，姜兴坤. 科技人才对区域经济发展影响差异研究——基于东、中、西区域数据的对比分析[J]. 广东社会科学, 2014(2): 15-21.
[29] 卞元超，吴利华，白俊红. 高铁开通是否促进了区域创新?[J]. 金融研究, 2019(6): 132-149.
[30] 夏怡然，陆铭. 跨越世纪的城市人力资本足迹——历史遗产、政策冲击和劳动力流动[J]. 经济研究, 2019(1): 132-149.
[31] CUTLER D M, LLERAS-MUNEY A. Understanding differences in health behaviors by education[J]. Journal of Health Economics, 2010, 29(1): 28.