Technology choice, input intensity, and enterprise innovation performance

Kang Zhiyong

PDF(929 KB)

Science Research Management ›› 2013 ›› Issue (6) : 42-49.

Technology choice, input intensity, and enterprise innovation performance

Kang Zhiyong

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Whether more advanced technology choice is better for enterprise innovation? Whether stronger input intensity is better for enterprise innovation? Based on the theoretical framework of appropriate technology, some exploratory research on these issues is carried out by using a large sample data of Chinese domestic enterprises in the manufacturing sector. Through empirical test, it is found that (1) under the control of the input intensity in enterprise innovation, there is also an inverted "U"-shaped relationship between the level of innovative technology and innovation performance; (2) under the control of the technical level of enterprise innovation, there is also an inverted "U"-shaped relationship between the input intensity in enterprise innovation and innovation performance. Therefore, over emphasis on the advance ness of technology and the high intensity of innovation input does not conduce to the improvement of innovation performance. Entrepreneurial innovation activity must follow a comparative advantage strategy to maximize the innovation performance through the promotion of the self-generated ability.

Key words

technology choice / appropriate technology / input intensity / innovation performance

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Kang Zhiyong. Technology choice, input intensity, and enterprise innovation performance[J]. Science Research Management. 2013(6): 42-49

References

[1] Lee, J. and Shim, E. Moderating effects of R&D on corporate growth in U.S. and Japanese hi-tech industries: an empirical study[J]. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 1995, 6: 179-191.
[2] Hall, B. H. and Oriani, R. Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy[J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2006, 24: 971-993.
[3] Ayadi, O. F., Dufrene, U. B. and Obi, C. P. Firm performance measures: temporal roadblocks to innovation? [J]. Managerial Finance, 1996, 22: 18-32.
[4] Huang, C. J. and Liu, C. J. Exploration for the relation ship between innovation, IT and performance[J]. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2005, 6: 237-252.
[5] Ming-Liang Yeh, Hsiao-Ping Chu, Peter Sher, Yi-Chia Chiu. R&D intensity, firm performance and the identification of the threshold: fresh evidence from the panel threshold regression model[J]. Applied Economics, 2010, 42(3): 389-401.
[6] Hu, Albert, G.. z. Ownership, Government R&D, Private R&D, and Productivity in Chinese Industry[J]. Journal of Comparative Economics, 2001, 29(1): l36-l57.
[7] 吴延兵. R&D与生产率—基于中国制造业的实证研究[J].经济研究,2006(11): 60-71.
[8] 李小平,朱钟棣. 国际贸易、R&D溢出和生产率增长[J].经济研究,2006(2): 32-43.
[9] 朱有为,徐康宁. 中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2006(11): 38-45.
[10] 张海洋. 我国工业R&D生产效率和影响因素—基于省级大中型工业数据的实证分析[J].科学学研究,2008(5): 970-978.
[11] Hsieh, Chang-Tai, Productivity Growth and Factor Prices in East Asia[J]. American Economic Review, 1999, 89(2):133-138.
[12] 林毅夫. 发展战略、自生能力和经济收敛[J].经济学(季刊),2002(2): 269-300
[13] Caselli, Francesco and Wilbur John Coleman II. The world Technology Frontier [R]. NBER Working Paper No. 7904, 2000.
[14] Basu, Susanto and David N. Weil. Appropriate Technology and Growth[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1998, 113(4): 1025-1054.
[15] Acemoglu , Daron and Fabrizio Zilibotti. Productivity Differences[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2001 , 116(2): 563-606.
[16] Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy[M]. New York: Harper & Brothers , 1942.
[17] 钱爱民,张新民. 新准则下利润结构质量分析体系的重构[J].会计研究,2008(6): 32-38.
[18] 陆国庆. 中国中小板上市公司产业创新的绩效研究[J].经济研究,2011(2): 138-148.
[19] 张军,吴桂英,张吉鹏. 中国省际物质资本存量估算:1952-2000[J].经济研究,2004(10): 35-44.
[20] 张军,金煜. 中国的金融深化和生产率关系的再检测:1987-2001[J].经济研究,2005(11): 34-45.
[21] 李玉红,王皓,郑玉歆. 企业演化:中国工业生产率增长的重要途径[J].经济研究,2008(6): 12-24.