Although the central and local government departments have repeatedly emphasized the need to further the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels", optimize the innovation environment and stimulate the enthusiasm of enterprises for innovation, the academia lacks systematic research on this view at the theoretical level. In order to promote the innovation development of science and technology micro- and small-enterprises, the scientific question that needs to be considered and verified is: does the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels" enhance the innovation willingness of technology micro- and small-enterprises? How does the reform enhance the willingness to innovate of technology micro- and small-enterprises? The in-depth discussion of these questions can help the government deepening the reform and promote the innovation development of technology micro- and small-enterprises.Based on the existing theories and literature, we construct a model of the relationship between the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels", innovation environment and innovative intention of enterprises to examine the mechanism of influence of the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels" on the innovative intention of technology micro- and small-enterprises. In this study, 399 valid questionnaires were collected from Chinese technology micro- and small-enterprises, and the questionnaire distribution method and the reliability and validity of the variables were tested to be acceptable for subsequent analysis. The results of the multiple regression analysis showed：(1) The two dimensions of the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels" (reducing red tape and giving autonomy to enterprises) and their interaction terms both positively affect the innovation environment and innovation willingness, and the effect of "decentralization" is stronger. (2) Innovation environment partially mediates the relationship between the two dimensions of the "streamline administration and delegate power" and willingness to innovate, and the mediating effect of innovation environment is stronger between the reduction of red tape and willingness to innovate. (3) There is a significant regional effect on the effect of decentralization on willingness to innovate, i.e., the effect of decentralization is generally more significant in traditional administrative regions, while the positive effect of innovation environment on the willingness to innovate of technology micro- and small-enterprises is stronger in emerging development zones. (4) Among the measures of the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels", "decentralization" measures, such as expanding enterprises′ production and operation power, relaxing market access conditions, and strengthening enterprises′ market responsibilities, are more effective in creating a good innovation environment and enhancing innovation intentions, and the various "decentralization" measures compared with "streamline administration" and "decentralization" can optimize the innovation environment and enhance the willingness to innovate of small and medium-sized enterprises in science and technology.Based on the above research, the practical implications of this study include: (1) The direct and interactive effects of the reform of "streamline administration and delegating power to lower levels" show that the "reduction" and "slimming" of non-technology government departments is also a booster to promote innovation-driven development strategy and enterprise innovation. The implementation of the decentralization of government should not only play the "simplification" and "decentralization" of their respective effectiveness, but also to play a good "combination" of the two, to give full effect to "streamline administration" and "decentralization" synergy. (2) The intermediary effect of innovation environment shows that government departments should deepen the decentralization and simplification of government to create a good innovation environment for science and technology micro- and small-enterprises, and then improve the innovation enthusiasm of science and technology micro- and small-enterprises. (3) The regional effect of decentralization suggests that the government should adopt targeted measures according to the characteristics and needs of different types of enterprises, and avoid a "one-size-fits-all" policy. (4) The decomposition effect of "Streamline administration and delegate power" shows that since "decentralization" can create a more innovative environment and enhance enterprises′ willingness to innovate. Then, government departments should effectively increase "decentralization" efforts, optimize the list of powers and responsibilities, relax market access restrictions, provide a more free and fair innovation environment for enterprise innovation, and stimulate the innovation enthusiasm of small and medium-sized enterprises in science and technology.
Key words
streamlining administration and delegating power to lower levels /
innovation environment /
enterprise innovative willingness /
S&T micro- and small-enterprise
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1]李克强：在全国深化“放管服”改革 优化营商环境电视电话会议上的讲话[EB/OL]. 2019-07-28. http://www.xinhuanet.com/2019-07/28/c_1124808469.html.
[2]孙荣, 梁丽. “互联网+”政务视域下的政府职能转变研究[J]. 南京社会科学, 2017(09): 64–72.
[3]陈天祥, 何红烨. 政府与社会组织关系折射下的政府职能转变——基于珠三角的一项问卷调查[J]. 四川师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2016, 43(04): 22–31.
[4]廖福崇. “放管服”改革优化了营商环境吗？ ——基于6144家民营企业数据的统计分析[J]. 当代经济管理, 2020(07): 1–16.
[5]夏后学, 谭清美. 简政放权与政府补贴如何影响技术创新[J]. 财贸经济, 2017, 38(05): 129–146.
[6]郑烨, 吴建南, 张攀. 简政放权、企业活力与企业创新绩效[J]. 科学学研究, 2017, 35(11): 1737–1749.
[7]刘遥, 吴建南. 简政放权、科技公共服务还是双管齐下[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2018(12): 1–8.
[8]Yu F, Guo Y, Le-Nguyen K, 等. The impact of government subsidies and enterprises’ R&D investment: A panel data study from renewable energy in China[J]. Energy Policy, Oxford: Elsevier Sci Ltd, 2016, 89: 106–113.
[9]马红, 侯贵生. 雾霾污染、地方政府行为与企业创新意愿——基于制造业上市公司的经验数据[J]. 软科学, 2020, 34(02): 27–32.
[10]Hamdouch, A., & Moulaert, F. Introduction: The knowledge infrastructure. Analysis, institutional dynamics and policy issues. Innovation[J]. The European Journal of Social Science Research, 2006, 19(1): 25–50.
[11]Kim J, Lee C Y. Technological regimes and firm survival[J]. Research policy, 2016, 45(1): 232–243.
[12]Karhunen H, Huovari J. R&D subsidies and productivity in SMEs[J]. Small business economics, 2015, 45(4): 805–823.
[13]简兆权, 刘念, 黄如意. 动态能力、企业规模与双元创新关系研究——基于fsQCA方法的实证分析[J]. 科技进步与对策, : 1–10.
[14]马志强, 范琳琳, 李钊. 新常态下科技型小微企业合作研发意愿影响因素及对策研究[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2015, 32(24): 76–80.
[15]Greve HR. A Behavioral theory of R&D Expenditures and Innova-tions:Evidence from Shipbuilding[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2003, 46: 685–702.
[16]马亮, 孙晓燕. 繁文缛节的起源、特征与影响[J]. 吉首大学学报(社会科学版), 2012, 33(06): 87-95+123.
[17]Zaltman G,Duncan R,Holbek J. Innovations and Organizations[M]. New York:John Wiley, 1973, 47.
[18]胡婉丽. 知识型雇员创新行为意愿测量工具研究:量表开发、提炼与检验[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2013, 30(01): 140–145.
[19]郑宝华, 王志华, 刘晓秋. 农业科技园区创新环境对创新绩效影响的实证研究[J]. 农业技术经济, 2014(12): 103–109.
[20]周景坤, 段忠贤. 区域创新环境与创新绩效的互动关系研究[J]. 科技管理研究, 2013, 33(22): 9–13.
[21]张莹, 张宗益. 区域创新环境对创新绩效影响的实证研究——以重庆市为例[J]. 科技管理研究, 2009, 29(02): 104–106.
[22]De Jong Gj, Van WITTELOOSTUIJN A. Regulatory red tape and private firm performance[J]. Public Administration, 2015.
[23]李垣, 田龙伟. 双元机制与企业创新[J]. 经济界, 2013(01): 30–32.
[24]郑烨, 王焕. 政府支持中小企业创新:理论基础、政策表征与作用路径[J]. 现代经济探讨, 2017(10): 126–132.
[25]石亚军.以简政放权放出活力和动力:重在应当放什么和怎样放[J].中国行政管理,2018(12):15-21.
[26]王金凤,岳俊举,冯立杰.政府支持与后发企业创新绩效——创新意愿的中介作用[J].技术经济与管理研究,2019(04):122-128.
[27]薛捷. 区域创新环境对科技型小微企业创新的影响——基于双元学习的中介作用[J]. 科学学研究, 2015(05 vo 33): 782–791.
[28]Collins P , Pontikakis D. Innovation Systems in the European Periphery: the Case of Ireland and Greece[J]. Science & Public Policy, 2006, 33(10): 757–769.
[29]Helpman E. Innovation,Imitation,and Intellectual Property Rights[J]. Econometrica, 1993, 61(6): 1247–1280.
[30]Darnall, Nicole,Edwards, Daniel. Predicting the Cost of Environmental Management System Adoption: The Role of Capabilities, Resources and Ownership Structure[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2006, 27(2): 301–320.
[31]McWilliams, A. ,Siegel, D. Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2000, 21: 603–609.
[32]Buesaa M, Heijsa J, Baumert T. The determinants of regional innovation in Europe:A combined factorial and regression knowledge production function approach[J]. Research Policy, 2010, 39(6): 722–735.
[33]Fu W Y, Diez J R, Schiller D. Regional innovation systems within a transitional context:Evolutionary comparison of the electronics industry in Shenzhen and Dongguan since the opening of China[J]. Journal of Economic Surveys, 2012, 26(3): 534–550.
[34]Coe,Helpman,Hoffmaister. North-South R&D Spillovers[J]. The Economic Journal, , 60(3): 134–149.
[35]郑烨, 杨若愚, 张顺翔. 公共服务供给、资源获取与中小企业创新绩效的关系研究[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2018, 30(04): 105–117.
[36]Samina Q，Abdul K K. Red tape，resigned satisfaction，public service motivation and negative employee attitudes and behaviors: Testing a model of moderated mediation[J]. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 2015, 35(4): 307–332.
[37]曹勇, 蒋振宇, 孙合林, 等. 知识溢出效应、创新意愿与创新能力——来自战略性新兴产业企业的实证研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2016, 34(01): 89–98.
[38]Hurley R F, Hult G T M. Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1998, 62(3): 42–54.
[39]滕堂伟, 陈佳怡, 司月芳. 国家高新区企业创新发展效应再认识——来自张江示范区的实证研究[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2019, 36(13): 31–38.
PDF(355 KB)
