Data is nonrival: a person’s location history, medical records, and driving data can be used by many firms simultaneously. Nonrivalry leads to increasing returns. As a result, there may be social gains to data being used broadly across firms, even in the presence of privacy considerations. Fearing creative destruction, firms may choose to hoard their data, leading to the inefficient use of nonrival data. Giving data property rights to consumers can generate allocations that are close to optimal. Consumers balance their concerns for privacy against the economic gains that come from selling data broadly. (JEL C80, D11, D21, D83, E22, K11, O34)

 企业生产经营中通过提高数据要素利用水平提升投资效率的机制，有赖于利用数据要素激活冗余资源所发挥的中介作用以及企业自身吸收能力的调节作用。笔者基于资源基础理论、代理理论以及吸收能力理论，构建了一个有调节的企业数据要素利用水平影响投资效率机制的研究模型，以国泰安数据库（CSMAR）2011—2021年沪深A股上市公司相关有效数据，运用多元线性回归分析方法，实证检验了企业数据要素利用水平与其投资效率之间的关联及其变化状况。检验结果证实：企业数据要素利用水平与其投资效率正相关；企业利用数据要素激活冗余资源对企业利用数据要素提高其投资效率具有中介作用；企业自身吸收能力正向调节企业利用数据要素激活冗余资源之间的关系。本研究尝试性地将资源基础理论、代理理论和吸收能力理论拓展到实证检验企业数据要素利用水平与其投资效率之间的内在关系上，所揭示的关于企业数据要素利用水平影响投资效率机制之研究结论，将丰富有关数据要素、投资效率、冗余资源、企业吸收能力等方面的相关文献，有助于为企业利用数据要素提升投资效率提供理论依据。

利用2013—2018年中国30个省（市、区）数据，运用耦合协调模型对“新基建”发展水平及其与战略性新兴产业间的耦合协调度进行测度，结果发现：中国“新基建”及其三大子系统的发展水平均偏低，其中以“创新基建”发展水平最低；总体看，各省（市、区）的“新基建”与战略性新兴产业发展尚未达到良性耦合状态，且其失调风险趋于扩大；历年各省（市、区）的耦合协调发展存在“高者恒高、低者恒低”的锁定效应，并在数量分布上呈耦合水平两头区域少而中间区域多的“橄榄”形结构，且多数区域的“新基建”领先于其战略性新兴产业发展。分子系统来看，“信息基建”与战略性新兴产业耦合发展的锁定效应最强，“融合基建”与战略性新兴产业的耦合发展突破了“橄榄”形结构，“创新基建”与战略性新兴产业的耦合协调水平相对最低，而东部地区经济社会强省的3类耦合协调发展均具辐射引领效应。实证检验发现，除自身因素驱动效应外，经济集聚、人力资本、固定资产投资、产业结构、研发投入、市场化程度等能不同程度促进“新基建”与战略性新兴产业的耦合协调发展。

以全国228个地级市为样本，采用NCA与fsQCA探究数字经济赋能科技创新的组态路径，并以“准胡焕庸线”、城市规模、是否为国家创新型城市等为分类标准，剖析数字经济赋能城市科技创新发展路径的异质性。研究结果表明：不存在引致城市高科技创新发展的单个必要条件,但产业融合对于城市高科技创新发展发挥相对普适作用。存在两条等效的引致城市高科技创新发展的组态：“政府助力下技术主导型”、“政府助力下环境主导型”，数据基础和治理数字化存在潜在替代关系。数字经济赋能城市科技创新发展的组态路径具有明显的区位异质性、规模异质性及政策效应异质性，整体来看产业融合、政府支持、信息基础设施是各类型城市高科技创新发展的关键。研究结论打开数字经济赋能科技创新的“黑箱”，为各类型城市借助数字化驱动创新发展提供了理论参考。

Based on the 228 cities of China as study cases, this paper summarizes six digital factors affecting urban S&T innovation under the TOE framework. Then this paper adopts the NCA method to measure the necessity degree of digital factors to promote the development of urban S&T innovation. Meanwhile the fsQCA method is selected to explore the configuration path of digital factors empowering S&T innovation from an urban scale perspective. Furthermore, 228 cities are divided into different sample sets, with the classification criteria such as the "quasi-Huanyong line", urban S&T innovation scale, and whether it is a national innovation city. After the six sample sets are calibrated and modeled separately, this paper analyzes the configuration heterogeneity of digital factors empowering urban S&T innovation. The results show that: First, there is no single necessary condition that leads to the development of high technology innovation, but industrial integration plays a universal role in promoting the development of high technology innovation in cities. Second, There are two ways to achieve high urban S&T innovation，named A1:"government support technology driven " and A2: "government promotion environment driven". Configuration A1 indicates that cities can achieve high S&T innovation improvement, with high level of information infrastructure, services digitalization, and industrial integration as the leading conditions, and solid database foundation and high government support as the supporting conditions. While A2 refers that the city can achieve high S&T innovation development when there is a complete information infrastructure, a high level of government support, services digitization, governance digitization, and industrial integration. At this time data base and digitalization of governance can be substituted with each other. Last but not least, there are clear configuration heterogeneity when cities have different geographic locations, S&T innovation scales, and innovation policies: ①governance digitalization plays a minor role in the southeast cities, while the northwest cities rely more on a high level of digital governance and industrial integration for their S&T innovation. ②government support and digital environment construction play a prominent role in technological innovation in "central cities", while "peripheral cities" depends on information infrastructure and industrial integration more.③industrial integration is critical factors for S&T innovation in national innovative cities, while non-national innovative cities still needs the linkage of information infrastructure. ④Overall, industrial integration, government support, and information infrastructure are the keys to S&T innovation improvement for all types of cities.Therefore, this paper proposes some management recommendations as follows. Firstly, all region should explore its own unique path of digitalization empowering S&T innovation, referring to the configuration template above from an overall perspective. Secondly, all cities should promote the synergy of digital service and governance of traditional government department, and form the localized digital development policy system with adaptation to local conditions, in order to provide support for cultivating a good digital environment for S&T innovation. Finally, all regions should actively promote the digital transformation of traditional industries, and build professional productive digital service platforms, promote "enterprises on the cloud" and "enterprises using the cloud", then set the digital economy industrial parks, leading to drive urban science and technology innovation with new models and new industries.

Qualitative comparative analysis is increasingly applied in strategy and organization research. The main purpose of our essay is to support this growing community of qualitative comparative analysis scholars by identifying best practices that can help guide researchers through the key stages of a qualitative comparative analysis empirical study (model building, sampling, calibration, data analysis, reporting, and interpretation of findings) and by providing examples of such practices drawn from strategy and organization studies. Coupled with this main purpose, we respond to Miller’s essay on configuration research by highlighting our points of agreement regarding his recommendations for configurational research and by addressing some of his concerns regarding qualitative comparative analysis. Our article thus contributes to configurational research by articulating how to leverage qualitative comparative analysis for enriching configurational theories of strategy and organization.

How should firms configure organizational capabilities to achieve competitive advantage in complex digital environments? To answer this question, we investigate parsimonious configurations for high firm performance in digital environments characterized by organized complexity. We adopt a configurational perspective accompanied by a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to explicate complex nonlinear relationships among key digital and non-digital capabilities in the form of conjunction, equifinality, and asymmetry in producing the outcome. With this approach, we shift attention from individual capabilities to configurations of capabilities to develop a better understanding of the complex role of IT in the digital world. Our analyses, using a rare and unique dataset of 376 observations for organizations in healthcare, education, manufacturing, and service sectors in the United States, reveal three key findings. First, IT-enabled information analytics capability alone is neither necessary nor sufficient in any configuration for high performance; however, it is an important component of the configurations in which it plays multifaceted roles varying from an enabling role in some contexts, to no role or a counterproductive role in other contexts. Second, we document a few parsimonious configurations emergent from complex nonlinear interactions among six organizational capabilities. Interestingly, these configurations often have an isomorphic structure that produces both high financial performance and high customer performance simultaneously. Third, the structures of configurations for high performance differ from those of not-high performance, suggesting an asymmetric view of causality that underpins organizational performance. Together, the findings provide implications for further research on complexity theory in digital business strategy, and for managers to view and redesign digital business strategy as configurations of IT and organizational capabilities.