Description of input–output variables.
Abstract
Innovation is the source of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship is the value embodiment of innovation, and the two are inseparable. At a time when dividends such as population, reform and opening up, and resources and environment are gradually disappearing, China urgently needs to accelerate scientific and technological innovation to support economic development, incubate scientific and technological enterprises, and ease labor market pressure with technological progress and efficiency improvement. This chapter focuses on China’s high-tech industry, which is dominated by scientific and technological innovation. Starting from the overall, local, and regional perspectives, it organically integrates the traditional DEA, similar SFA, Malmquist index decomposition, chain multiple intermediary effect, and other multilevel research through cross-level analysis. Based on the research foundation of innovation efficiency after eliminating environmental and random factors, it deeply discusses the action path and impact mechanism of “double innovation” and provides targeted policy recommendations for the government and relevant local departments. The research confirms that the total effect of innovation on entrepreneurship is always positive, i.e., promoting “people-to-people innovation” is conducive to promoting “mass entrepreneurship” whether it is analyzed from the whole or from the part.
Keywords
- Innovation
- High-tech industry
- DEA
1. Introduction
Innovation is the source of starting a business. In the process of starting a business, one needs to have a continuous and vigorous sense of innovation before one can produce creative ideas or schemes and explore new modes and outlets. Entrepreneurship is the embodiment of the value of innovation. The value of innovation mainly lies in transforming technology into productivity, and the fundamental way to realize this transformation is entrepreneurship. It can be seen that innovation and entrepreneurship are inseparable. Studying the internal relationship and mechanism between the two can not only provide an important theoretical basis and guidance for China to promote “double innovation” and prevent “deviation and deviation” in the middle of the process but also lead enterprises to carry out efficient innovation input and output, accelerate enterprises to adapt to the new normal, and provide power and guarantee for promoting innovation-driven strategy in depth.
With the accelerated process of economic globalization and the increasingly complicated and steep international market, China, as the largest developing country, urgently needs to play the role of a leader in scientific and technological innovation to support economic development, incubate scientific and technological enterprises, and relieve the pressure on the labor market at a time when its low-cost comparative advantages in production factors such as demographic dividend, reform and opening-up dividend, resources and environment dividend, and the resulting labor force no longer exist. Therefore, this chapter focuses on China’s high-tech industry, which is dominated by scientific and technological innovation. Starting from the overall, local, and even regional perspectives, it attempts to organically integrate the traditional DEA, similar SFA, Malmquist index decomposition, chain multiple intermediary effect, and other multilevel research. Based on the research on innovation efficiency after eliminating environmental and random factors, it comprehensively and deeply discusses the action path and impact mechanism of “double innovation” and provides targeted policy recommendations for the government and relevant local departments.
This article will summarize and review the relevant literature from three aspects: innovation, entrepreneurship, and innovation and entrepreneurship.
First, about innovation. Scholars at home and abroad have conducted in-depth research on the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry from different perspectives. From the viewpoint of spatial economics, nonparametric DEA-Malmquist index method is used to explore the main factors affecting the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industries [1]. Starting from the perspective of industry comparison, the panel stochastic frontier method (SFA) is used to evaluate the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry, and the influencing factors of innovation efficiency are analyzed [2]. The research proves that institutional innovation and the technicality of scientific researchers are the keys to improve the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry. From the perspective of value chain, Xiao et al. [3] empirically tested various factors that can affect innovation efficiency by using two-stage chain-linked DEA and Tobit models. The research shows that government support, financial environment, and other factors have a significant impact on innovation efficiency. And Chiu et al. [4], based on the value chain perspective, constructed a model combining research and development investment and operation process and measured the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry research and development value chain. In addition, there are many scholars from the SCP analysis perspective of industrial organization theory to study the impact of enterprise size, market power, technological opportunities, market process, and other factors on innovation efficiency [5, 6].
Second, about starting a business. Entrepreneurship is a social activity involving various phenomena, and scholars at home and abroad have conducted in-depth research on it from different angles such as economics, sociology, and management. Chen and Yang [7] based on microeconomics theory and from the perspective of industry differences analyzed the differences in the impact of various types of entrepreneurship on enterprise R&D incentives. Cao et al. [8] based on the social learning theory put forward a model of imitating entrepreneurial decision-making mechanism of high-tech industrial clusters. The study found that entrepreneurs implement entrepreneurial decision-making behavior under the stimulus of entrepreneurial motivation through observation and learning. Wang and Xue [9] set out from the theory of organizational learning to construct the framework of intellectual property entrepreneurship under the background of China’s transformation and upgrading and take high-tech industry as an example to carry out empirical analysis to perfect the theory of intellectual property entrepreneurship. Franco and Filson [10] based on the innovation theory, on the basis of the knowledge spillover effect mechanism of employee flow diffusion, allow employees of current companies to imitate the behavior of their former employers, theoretically analyze the equilibrium conditions for Pareto optimality, and find out through simulation that derivative enterprises established by R&D personnel usually have higher R&D willingness and efficiency than other types of entrepreneurs.
Third, about innovation and entrepreneurship. At present, there are few studies abroad that can consider innovation and entrepreneurship together, and there are two completely opposite views. One view is that entrepreneurship is the process of realizing innovation, and innovation is the essential core of entrepreneurship [11]. From this point of view, innovation and entrepreneurship have an internal connection mechanism. However, another view is that entrepreneurship may involve innovation process, but it may not include innovation behavior [12], and there is no inevitable connection between innovation and entrepreneurship. Domestic scholars, mainly based on high-tech industries, empirically study the interaction between innovation and entrepreneurship. Based on the questionnaire survey data of China’s high-tech industrial development zones, taking into account the dual effects of innovation activities and entrepreneurial activities within innovation clusters on the development of innovation clusters, this chapter makes an empirical analysis on the development of entrepreneurship, innovation, and innovation clusters in China’s high-tech industries [13]. Jin and Xie [14], based on the actual development of China’s high-tech industry, explored the role of government in the process of enterprise innovation and entrepreneurship.
Compared with previous literatures, the innovation of this chapter mainly includes the following two aspects: from the perspective of research content, the relationship between innovation and entrepreneurship studied in this chapter is a relatively blank research field, and the relevant research results at home and abroad are less, and the conclusions are quite different, while the research on the internal mechanism of innovation’s impact on entrepreneurship combined with intermediary effect is even less, so this chapter is novel in content. From the perspective of research methods, this chapter firstly decomposes total factor productivity (TFP) based on DEA model excluding environmental and random factors and then uses chain multiple intermediary effect model to analyze the influencing process and mechanism among various variables and further analyzes the relationship between innovation and entrepreneurship in high-tech industries. Compared with the previous literature, this chapter emphasizes the application of cross-level analysis in methodology; organically combines the traditional DEA, similar SFA, Malmquist index decomposition, chain multiple intermediary effect, and other multilevel related researches; and further discusses the action path and influencing mechanism of double innovation in a more comprehensive and in-depth way.
2. Research methods
The research can be divided into the following four stages.
2.1 The first stage: traditional DEA
Referring to the related literatures on R&D input–output efficiency of high-tech industry, this chapter selects the input-oriented variable-scale BCC model to carry out the first phase of calculation. The main reason for choosing BCC model is its variable scale. Problems such as unequal competition and resource constraints in domestic high-tech industries may cause some decision-making units (DMU) to be unable to operate at the optimal scale, and the measurement of technical efficiency will be affected by scale efficiency. Considering this situation, BCC model adds convex conditions, allowing technical efficiency (TE) to be further decomposed into pure technical efficiency (PTE) and scale efficiency (SE), which is helpful to analyze the influencing factors of R&D input–output efficiency in China’s high-tech industry in recent years.
2.2 The second stage: similar SFA
On the basis of the previous research stage, the difference between the actual input and the target input of the final accounting unit is calculated, i.e., the input slack, and a similar SFA model is constructed with the input slack as the dependent variable and the environmental factor as the independent variable, so as to separate the efficiency values affected by the external environment and random error factors and thus obtain the redundancy of the input of the decision-making unit caused only by the inefficiency of management.
2.3 The third stage: adjusted DEA and Malmquist index
According to the method proposed by Fried [15], the adjusted input data are substituted into BCC model again for efficiency analysis, thus obtaining the efficiency values of DMU after eliminating environmental factors and random factors. Compared with the traditional DEA model, the efficiency value thus obtained is closer to the real value. Since the data of DMU being evaluated is panel data including multiple time points, Malmquist TFP index can be used to analyze the effects of productivity changes, technical efficiency, and technological progress on productivity changes, respectively.
2.4 The fourth stage: chain multiple mediation effect
The total factor productivity excluding environmental and random factors is taken as the proxy variable to measure the innovation level in each region. The number of new ventures in high-tech industries, regional economic growth, and entrepreneurship in each region are included in the research framework, and an intermediary chain is formed according to the sequential characteristics of the intermediary variables. Through the intermediary effect model, the relationship between multiple variables and the process and mechanism of the influence between variables are analyzed simultaneously. This stage is mainly based on structural equation model (SEM) to carry out the above analysis. The following regression equations can be used to describe the relationship between variables:
The corresponding path of chain multiple mediation effect is shown in Figure 1.
As shown in Figure 1, the multiple mediation model includes two mediation variables
3. Variable selection and data description
3.1 Input–output indicators
Data on capital input, personnel input, and innovation output are all derived from China’s High-tech Industry Statistical Yearbook. As capital investment data are often affected by price fluctuations, the relevant data should be reduced by using fixed asset investment price index (last year = 100) of corresponding years in all provinces and cities, and the provincial fixed asset investment price index data of each year comes from China Statistical Yearbook. In addition, Tibet and Xinjiang were excluded from the sample due to the serious lack of data. In order to eliminate the time lag between input and output and the difference between innovation activity cycles, this study chooses the time lag as 1 year, i.e., the input data is 2004–2013 and the output data is 2005–2014. In addition, because the internal expenditure of R&D funds, expenditure of new product development, and expenditure of technological transformation not only have an impact on the input–output efficiency of high-tech industries in the current period but also will have an important impact in some future periods, it is first necessary to convert the flow data into stock and then measure the impact of these three capital inputs on the innovation-output efficiency. Taking the calculation of R&D fund stock as an example, the method of permanent storage is used to deal with it.
In Eq. (2),
Variable | Symbol | Unit | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
Innovation output 1 | y1 | Item | Number of patent applications |
Innovation output 2 | y2 | Ten thousand yuan | Revenue from sales of new products |
Innovation (personnel) input 1 | x1 | Person/year | Full-time equivalent of R&D personnel refers to the sum of the number of R&D full-time personnel plus part-time personnel converted into the current number of personnel according to the workload during the reporting year |
Innovation (capital) investment 2 | x2 | Ten thousand yuan | The stock of R&D funds is calculated by the perpetual inventory method |
Innovation (capital) investment 3 | x3 | Ten thousand yuan | The stock of new product development funds shall be accounted for by the perpetual inventory method |
Innovation (capital) investment 4 | x4 | Ten thousand yuan | The stock of funds for technological transformation shall be accounted for by the perpetual inventory method |
3.2 Environmental variables
Environmental variables are mainly used to reflect the geographic location of high-tech industries, macroenvironment, and government innovation support policies. Based on the relevant research foundation at home and abroad, and considering the characteristics of R&D and the availability of data, this chapter mainly selects the following indicators.
3.2.1 Regional real GDP
Real GDP can accurately reflect regional differences and the real level of regional economic development, so this chapter uses real GDP excluding price factors instead of nominal GDP. Generally speaking, the higher the regional economic development level, the more capable it is to invest in R&D innovation in high-tech industries and the higher the R&D innovation level.
3.2.2 Geographical location
Whether a region is located in a superior geographical position is crucial to the development of high-tech industries in the region. This chapter quantifies this variable by setting virtual variables, in which “1” is used to represent the eastern region, including Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Shandong, Guangdong, and Hainan. “2” means the central region, including Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Anhui, Jiangxi, Henan, Hubei, and Hunan; “0” means the western region, including Chongqing, Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Guangxi, and Ningxia. Due to the serious lack of data in Xinjiang and Tibet, this article will not consider it for the time being.
3.2.3 Quality of local workers
In view of the availability of data, this chapter chooses the number of college students in the studied area as the characterization variable of laborer’s quality. The higher the quality of local laborers, the more likely it is to provide more talents and intellectual support for the development of high-tech industries and the more conducive to the improvement of R&D efficiency.
3.2.4 Local government innovation support
Local government support has an important impact on the R&D and innovation process of high-tech industries. This chapter selects the government funds from the funds raised for scientific and technological activities to represent the innovation support of local governments. Generally speaking, local government support can provide guarantee for the infrastructure construction of high-tech industries in the region as well as financial support. The greater the support, the more conducive to R&D and innovation in high-tech industries.
3.2.5 Regional science and technology development level
Due to the spatial aggregation effect and spillover effect of high-tech industries, the degree of technological development in a region often plays an important role in the development of high-tech industries. This chapter chooses the number of high-tech industrial enterprises and the number of scientific and technological institutions to represent the degree of scientific and technological development in a region. In general, the more high-tech enterprises and scientific and technological institutions there are, the more conducive they are to R&D and innovation in high-tech industries.
Among the above environmental variables, except that the actual GDP of each region comes from China Statistical Yearbook, other data come from China High-tech Industry Statistical Yearbook. Descriptive statistics of relevant variables are shown in Table 2.
Variable | Symbol | Observed value | Mean value | Standard deviation | Minimum value | Maximum value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Regional real GDP | 261 | 13,824.85 | 11,858 | 572.37 | 62,924.62 | |
Geographical position | 261 | 1 | 0.7894 | 0 | 2 | |
Quality of local laborers | 261 | 746,585 | 437,384.5 | 35,983 | 1,796,665 | |
Local government innovation support | 261 | 36,197.87 | 51,416.87 | 10 | 289,006.9 | |
Number of high-tech industrial enterprises | 261 | 853.29 | 1208.19 | 14 | 5874 | |
Number of scientific and technological institutions | 261 | 156.69 | 319.04 | 1 | 2474 |
3.3 Mediating effect variables
Taking the total factor productivity (X) obtained by Malmquist index decomposition in the third stage as the independent variable. The dependent variable is the logarithm (Y) of the number of newly built entrepreneurs in individual and private enterprises in high-tech industries. The variable is obtained by using the difference between the number of private enterprises and individual workers in urban employment at the end of the year in the China Statistical Yearbook 2005–2014.The intermediate variables are, respectively, the logarithm of the number of new ventures (M1) and the logarithm of the actual GDP of each region (M2). Among them, the number of new ventures is obtained by year-on-year difference using the number of enterprises in the China Statistical Yearbook from 2005 to 2014. The actual GDP of each region comes from the China Statistical Yearbook.
4. Empirical analysis
4.1 Empirical analysis of traditional DEA in the first stage
DEAP software is used to preliminarily measure the comprehensive technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency of 29 provinces and cities in China from 2005 to 2014. The results are shown in Tables 3–5. According to the calculation results before adjustment, the average value of China’s R&D comprehensive technical efficiency is 0.48–0.67 from 2005 to 2014, without considering the interference of external environment and random influence factors, which generally shows a rising trend. The average value of pure technical efficiency is 0.63–0.73, with room for improvement to varying degrees. The average value of scale efficiency is 0.753–0.926, and the overall efficiency level is relatively high. Generally speaking, the R&D efficiency of most provinces is below the efficiency frontier. As the result does not eliminate the influence of environmental factors and random interference factors, it cannot accurately measure the true level of the comprehensive technical efficiency of each province, so further adjustment and measurement are needed.
Provinces | Year | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | ||
Beijing | BA | 0.27 | 0.30 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.45 | 0.45 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.92 | |
Tianjin | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.83 | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.64 | 0.87 | 1.00 | 0.92 | |
Hebei | BA | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.40 | 0.28 | 0.43 | 0.28 | 0.44 | 0.43 | 0.50 |
AA | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.23 | 0.31 | 0.43 | |
Shanxi | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.52 |
AA | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.17 | 0.12 | |
Inner Mongolia | BA | 1.00 | 0.41 | 0.05 | 0.27 | 1.00 | 0.61 | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 0.34 |
AA | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | |
Liaoning | BA | 0.24 | 0.14 | 0.22 | 0.48 | 0.62 | 0.47 | 0.61 | 0.45 | 0.63 | 0.59 |
AA | 0.22 | 0.16 | 0.24 | 0.36 | 0.32 | 0.30 | 0.40 | 0.43 | 0.49 | 0.49 | |
Jilin | BA | 0.42 | 0.12 | 0.19 | 0.58 | 0.65 | 0.35 | 0.56 | 0.64 | 0.61 | 0.54 |
AA | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.25 | 0.21 | |
Heilongjiang | BA | 0.50 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.23 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.24 | 0.30 | 0.29 | 0.45 |
AA | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.25 | 0.32 | |
Shanghai | BA | 0.86 | 0.53 | 0.63 | 0.88 | 0.50 | 0.55 | 0.73 | 0.57 | 0.70 | 0.87 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.81 | 0.82 | 0.70 | 0.85 | 0.83 | |
Jiangsu | BA | 0.28 | 0.27 | 0.37 | 0.70 | 0.80 | 0.69 | 0.97 | 1.00 | 0.66 | 0.81 |
AA | 0.61 | 0.69 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Zhejiang | BA | 0.18 | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.43 | 0.60 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.63 | 0.71 | 0.58 |
AA | 0.33 | 0.40 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.64 | 0.57 | 0.72 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.91 | |
Anhui | BA | 0.74 | 0.50 | 0.21 | 0.34 | 0.76 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.23 | 0.33 | 0.64 | 0.83 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Fujian | BA | 0.86 | 0.68 | 0.66 | 0.86 | 0.82 | 0.77 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.56 | 0.51 |
AA | 0.72 | 0.71 | 0.72 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.63 | 0.70 | 0.69 | 0.66 | |
Jiangxi | BA | 0.15 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.29 | 0.37 | 0.28 | 0.42 | 0.53 | 0.69 |
AA | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.26 | 0.42 | 0.58 | |
Shandong | BA | 0.45 | 0.24 | 0.38 | 0.50 | 0.54 | 0.63 | 0.65 | 0.60 | 0.53 | 0.58 |
AA | 0.51 | 0.54 | 0.67 | 0.71 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.80 | 0.76 | 0.75 | |
Henan | BA | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.69 | 0.51 | 0.71 | 0.48 | 0.51 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.20 | 0.30 | 0.33 | 0.44 | 0.51 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Hubei | BA | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.36 | 0.54 | 0.50 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.55 | 0.52 |
AA | 0.16 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.38 | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.58 | 0.68 | 0.58 | |
Hunan | BA | 0.19 | 0.15 | 0.12 | 0.70 | 0.94 | 0.86 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.85 |
AA | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.27 | 0.26 | 0.56 | 0.59 | 0.79 | 0.86 | |
Guangdong | BA | 0.35 | 0.33 | 0.32 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 1.00 | 0.91 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Guangxi | BA | 0.56 | 0.15 | 0.11 | 0.55 | 0.49 | 0.41 | 0.52 | 0.53 | 0.68 | 0.57 |
AA | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.16 | |
Hainan | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.85 |
AA | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.07 | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.15 | |
Chongqing | BA | 0.29 | 0.25 | 0.17 | 0.44 | 0.94 | 0.71 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.94 | 0.97 |
AA | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.23 | 0.22 | 0.41 | 0.34 | 0.51 | 0.53 | |
Sichuan | BA | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.54 | 0.35 | 1.00 | 0.82 | 0.70 | 0.98 |
AA | 0.29 | 0.33 | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.53 | 0.41 | 0.55 | 0.80 | 0.84 | 0.90 | |
Guizhou | BA | 0.22 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.49 | 0.58 | 0.62 | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.42 | 0.45 |
AA | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.11 | 0.14 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.28 | 0.35 | 0.37 | |
Yunnan | BA | 1.00 | 0.20 | 0.46 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.80 | 0.92 | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.64 |
AA | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.14 | |
Shaanxi | BA | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.27 | 0.25 | 0.29 | 0.24 |
AA | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.19 | 0.22 | 0.29 | 0.32 | 0.44 | 0.37 | |
Gansu | BA | 0.53 | 0.27 | 0.17 | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.94 | 0.46 | 0.68 | 0.59 | 0.63 |
AA | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.11 | |
Qinghai | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.39 | 0.59 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.16 | 0.99 | 0.49 |
AA | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | |
Ningxia | BA | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.10 | 0.28 | 0.31 | 0.41 | 0.69 | 0.69 | 1.00 | 0.35 |
AA | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.08 | 0.03 | |
Average value | BA | 0.48 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.58 | 0.65 | 0.66 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 0.72 | 0.67 |
AA | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.30 | 0.31 | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.40 | 0.45 | 0.53 | 0.53 |
Provinces | Year | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | ||
Beijing | BA | 0.50 | 0.59 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.96 | 0.96 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Tianjin | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Hebei | BA | 0.13 | 0.28 | 0.15 | 0.44 | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0.28 | 0.45 | 0.44 | 0.50 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | |
Shanxi | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.85 | 0.98 | 0.88 | 0.55 |
AA | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Inner Mongolia | BA | 1.00 | 0.49 | 0.15 | 0.59 | 1.00 | 0.78 | 0.61 | 0.71 | 0.62 | 0.49 |
AA | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Liaoning | BA | 0.59 | 0.29 | 0.27 | 0.48 | 0.75 | 0.53 | 0.61 | 0.46 | 0.66 | 0.60 |
AA | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.95 | |
Jilin | BA | 0.44 | 0.32 | 0.40 | 0.59 | 0.67 | 0.35 | 0.56 | 0.65 | 0.63 | 0.57 |
AA | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.96 | |
Heilongjiang | BA | 0.64 | 0.22 | 0.10 | 0.25 | 0.21 | 0.27 | 0.27 | 0.31 | 0.32 | 0.46 |
AA | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.96 | |
Shanghai | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.73 | 0.70 | 0.77 | 0.57 | 0.75 | 0.88 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.89 | 0.96 | 0.89 | 0.93 | 0.99 | |
Jiangsu | BA | 0.60 | 0.36 | 0.78 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.98 | 0.87 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Zhejiang | BA | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.55 | 0.57 | 0.83 | 0.63 | 0.74 | 0.90 | 1.00 | 0.88 |
AA | 0.91 | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.79 | 0.91 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.91 | |
Anhui | BA | 0.91 | 0.51 | 0.28 | 0.64 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Fujian | BA | 0.88 | 0.68 | 0.78 | 0.93 | 0.91 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.57 | 0.52 |
AA | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 0.77 | |
Jiangxi | BA | 0.23 | 0.22 | 0.12 | 0.20 | 0.29 | 0.38 | 0.29 | 0.42 | 0.53 | 0.70 |
AA | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.93 | 0.90 | 0.91 | 0.98 | |
Shandong | BA | 0.87 | 0.58 | 0.73 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.78 | 0.72 | 0.69 | 0.66 | 0.66 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.87 | 0.84 | 0.78 | |
Henan | BA | 0.15 | 0.66 | 0.45 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.84 | 0.53 | 0.56 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.97 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Hubei | BA | 0.84 | 0.51 | 0.34 | 0.44 | 0.62 | 0.53 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.60 | 0.52 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 0.93 | |
Hunan | BA | 0.29 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.81 | 1.00 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.85 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.97 | |
Guangdong | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Guangxi | BA | 0.74 | 0.23 | 0.16 | 0.56 | 0.50 | 0.42 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.70 | 0.61 |
AA | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.98 | |
Hainan | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.88 |
AA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Chongqing | BA | 0.31 | 0.49 | 0.27 | 0.61 | 0.96 | 0.77 | 1.00 | 0.81 | 0.94 | 0.98 |
AA | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 1.00 | |
Sichuan | BA | 0.26 | 0.34 | 0.54 | 0.44 | 0.56 | 0.52 | 1.00 | 0.82 | 0.74 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.92 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.96 | 1.00 | |
Guizhou | BA | 0.25 | 0.73 | 0.39 | 0.71 | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.42 | 0.46 |
AA | 0.93 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.94 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.90 | |
Yunnan | BA | 1.00 | 0.55 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 0.77 | 0.66 |
AA | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.99 | |
Shaanxi | BA | 0.17 | 0.12 | 0.16 | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.25 | 0.32 | 0.24 |
AA | 0.92 | 0.89 | 0.93 | 0.88 | 0.85 | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.78 | 0.80 | 0.77 | |
Gansu | BA | 1.00 | 0.27 | 0.18 | 0.50 | 0.46 | 0.95 | 0.46 | 0.74 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
AA | 0.95 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Qinghai | BA | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
AA | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
Ningxia | BA | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.49 | 0.47 | 0.73 | 0.83 | 1.00 | 0.49 |
AA | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.95 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 1.00 | |
Average value | BA | 0.63 | 0.53 | 0.52 | 0.68 | 0.75 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.77 | 0.73 |
AA | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.96 |
Provinces | Year | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | ||
Beijing | BA | 0.530 (drs) | 0.510 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) |
AA | 0.463 (irs) | 0.469 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.974 (irs) | 0.923 (irs) | |
Tianjin | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) |
AA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.900 (irs) | 0.831 (irs) | 0.824 (irs) | 0.920 (irs) | 0.637 (irs) | 0.869 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.921 (irs) | |
Hebei | BA | 0.944 (drs) | 0.318 (drs) | 0.672 (drs) | 0.902 (drs) | 0.820 (drs) | 0.887 (drs) | 0.988 (irs) | 0.985 (irs) | 0.989 (drs) | 0.992 (irs) |
AA | 0.058 (irs) | 0.054 (irs) | 0.071 (irs) | 0.107 (irs) | 0.130 (irs) | 0.128 (irs) | 0.160 (irs) | 0.227 (irs) | 0.314 (irs) | 0.427 (irs) | |
Shanxi | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.980 (irs) | 0.974 (irs) | 0.994 (drs) | 0.944 (irs) |
AA | 0.012 (irs) | 0.022 (irs) | 0.050 (irs) | 0.036 (irs) | 0.041 (irs) | 0.081 (irs) | 0.076 (irs) | 0.127 (irs) | 0.169 (irs) | 0.118 (irs) | |
Inner Mongolia | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 0.838 (irs) | 0.336 (irs) | 0.451 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.781 (irs) | 0.926 (irs) | 0.793 (irs) | 0.910 (irs) | 0.691 (irs) |
AA | 0.007 (irs) | 0.003 (irs) | 0.002 (irs) | 0.002 (irs) | 0.023 (irs) | 0.015 (irs) | 0.017 (irs) | 0.015 (irs) | 0.026 (irs) | 0.025 (irs) | |
Liaoning | BA | 0.414 (drs) | 0.500 (drs) | 0.807 (drs) | 0.989 (drs) | 0.831 (drs) | 0.880 (drs) | 0.999 (irs) | 0.994 (irs) | 0.951 (drs) | 0.991 (irs) |
AA | 0.218 (irs) | 0.162 (irs) | 0.239 (irs) | 0.356 (irs) | 0.319 (irs) | 0.303 (irs) | 0.399 (irs) | 0.435 (irs) | 0.490 (irs) | 0.510 (irs) | |
Jilin | BA | 0.949 (drs) | 0.388 (drs) | 0.468 (drs) | 0.980 (drs) | 0.969 (drs) | 0.989 (drs) | 0.989 (irs) | 0.979 (irs) | 0.962 (irs) | 0.959 (irs) |
AA | 0.062 (irs) | 0.029 (irs) | 0.052 (irs) | 0.059 (irs) | 0.118 (irs) | 0.054 (irs) | 0.113 (irs) | 0.181 (irs) | 0.257 (irs) | 0.219 (irs) | |
Heilongjiang | BA | 0.774 (drs) | 0.272 (drs) | 0.800 (drs) | 0.912 (drs) | 0.887 (drs) | 0.762 (drs) | 0.874 (drs) | 0.990 (irs) | 0.911 (drs) | 0.978 (irs) |
AA | 0.133 (irs) | 0.036 (irs) | 0.054 (irs) | 0.072 (irs) | 0.095 (irs) | 0.105 (irs) | 0.176 (irs) | 0.211 (irs) | 0.259 (irs) | 0.338 (irs) | |
Shanghai | BA | 0.862 (drs) | 0.528 (drs) | 0.690 (drs) | 0.875 (drs) | 0.690 (drs) | 0.783 (drs) | 0.958 (drs) | 0.998 (irs) | 0.928 (drs) | 0.990 (drs) |
AA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.952 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.934 (irs) | 0.906 (irs) | 0.852 (irs) | 0.795 (irs) | 0.913 (irs) | 0.833 (irs) | |
Jiangsu | BA | 0.470 (drs) | 0.746 (drs) | 0.472 (drs) | 0.696 (drs) | 0.795 (drs) | 0.685 (drs) | 0.974 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.657 (drs) | 0.806 (drs) |
AA | 0.625 (irs) | 0.794 (irs) | 0.962 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | |
Zhejiang | BA | 0.462 (drs) | 0.373 (drs) | 0.319 (drs) | 0.753 (drs) | 0.729 (drs) | 0.738 (drs) | 0.681 (drs) | 0.705 (drs) | 0.708 (drs) | 0.661 (drs) |
AA | 0.363 (irs) | 0.470 (irs) | 0.566 (irs) | 0.618 (irs) | 0.708 (irs) | 0.708 (irs) | 0.839 (irs) | 0.990 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.997 (irs) | |
Anhui | BA | 0.820 (drs) | 0.988 (drs) | 0.765 (drs) | 0.531 (drs) | 0.758 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) |
AA | 0.050 (irs) | 0.057 (irs) | 0.063 (irs) | 0.071 (irs) | 0.226 (irs) | 0.333 (irs) | 0.641 (irs) | 0.834 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | |
Fujian | BA | 0.978 (drs) | 0.996 (drs) | 0.846 (drs) | 0.928 (drs) | 0.908 (drs) | 0.869 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.978 (drs) | 0.990 (drs) |
AA | 0.725 (irs) | 0.720 (irs) | 0.729 (irs) | 0.683 (irs) | 0.696 (irs) | 0.834 (irs) | 0.634 (irs) | 0.748 (irs) | 0.846 (irs) | 0.851 (irs) | |
Jiangxi | BA | 0.621 (drs) | 0.510 (drs) | 0.806 (drs) | 0.923 (drs) | 0.984 (drs) | 0.974 (drs) | 0.994 (irs) | 0.990 (irs) | 0.997 (drs) | 0.993 (irs) |
AA | 0.090 (irs) | 0.069 (irs) | 0.080 (irs) | 0.080 (irs) | 0.148 (irs) | 0.187 (irs) | 0.186 (irs) | 0.285 (irs) | 0.467 (irs) | 0.586 (irs) | |
Shandong | BA | 0.522 (drs) | 0.422 (drs) | 0.520 (drs) | 0.765 (drs) | 0.837 (drs) | 0.810 (drs) | 0.905 (drs) | 0.865 (drs) | 0.807 (drs) | 0.884 (drs) |
AA | 0.505 (irs) | 0.535 (irs) | 0.666 (irs) | 0.746 (irs) | 0.881 (irs) | 0.856 (irs) | 0.908 (irs) | 0.921 (irs) | 0.904 (irs) | 0.963 (irs) | |
Henan | BA | 0.947 (drs) | 0.186 (drs) | 0.383 (drs) | 0.871 (drs) | 0.643 (drs) | 0.839 (drs) | 0.905 (drs) | 0.905 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) |
AA | 0.080 (irs) | 0.090 (irs) | 0.140 (irs) | 0.200 (irs) | 0.301 (irs) | 0.326 (irs) | 0.459 (irs) | 0.532 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | |
Hubei | BA | 0.505 (irs) | 0.259 (drs) | 0.481 (drs) | 0.824 (drs) | 0.871 (drs) | 0.935 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.946 (drs) | 0.916 (drs) | 0.999 (irs) |
AA | 0.162 (irs) | 0.109 (irs) | 0.168 (irs) | 0.175 (irs) | 0.384 (irs) | 0.370 (irs) | 0.436 (irs) | 0.581 (irs) | 0.684 (crs) | 0.620 (irs) | |
Hunan | BA | 0.642 (drs) | 0.839 (drs) | 0.702 (drs) | 0.866 (drs) | 0.936 (drs) | 0.911 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.999 (irs) |
AA | 0.039 (irs) | 0.042 (irs) | 0.049 (irs) | 0.105 (irs) | 0.270 (irs) | 0.260 (irs) | 0.555 (irs) | 0.592 (irs) | 0.793 (irs) | 0.886 (irs) | |
Guangdong | BA | 0.354 (drs) | 0.327 (drs) | 0.322 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.833 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.911 (drs) | 0.951 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) |
AA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | |
Guangxi | BA | 0.752 (drs) | 0.642 (drs) | 0.679 (drs) | 0.976 (drs) | 0.980 (drs) | 0.976 (drs) | 0.970 (irs) | 0.964 (irs) | 0.975 (irs) | 0.942 (irs) |
AA | 0.043 (irs) | 0.016 (irs) | 0.027 (irs) | 0.035 (irs) | 0.052 (irs) | 0.038 (irs) | 0.085 (irs) | 0.115 (irs) | 0.170 (irs) | 0.160 (irs) | |
Hainan | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.966 (irs) |
AA | 0.002 (irs) | 0.001 (irs) | 0.005 (irs) | 0.003 (irs) | 0.045 (irs) | 0.022 (irs) | 0.070 (irs) | 0.116 (irs) | 0.141 (irs) | 0.150 (irs) | |
Chongqing | BA | 0.934 (drs) | 0.516 (drs) | 0.631 (drs) | 0.725 (drs) | 0.973 (drs) | 0.925 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.993 (irs) | 0.999 (irs) | 0.992 (irs) |
AA | 0.076 (irs) | 0.083 (irs) | 0.088 (irs) | 0.134 (irs) | 0.235 (irs) | 0.227 (irs) | 0.413 (irs) | 0.349 (irs) | 0.519 (irs) | 0.530 (irs) | |
Sichuan | BA | 0.815 (drs) | 0.675 (drs) | 0.458 (drs) | 0.664 (drs) | 0.973 (drs) | 0.672 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.999 (drs) | 0.947 (drs) | 0.984 (drs) |
AA | 0.302 (irs) | 0.344 (irs) | 0.466 (irs) | 0.419 (irs) | 0.584 irs) | 0.447 (irs) | 0.552 (irs) | 0.816 (irs) | 0.873 (irs) | 0.899 (irs) | |
Guizhou | BA | 0.865 (drs) | 0.224 (drs) | 0.330 (drs) | 0.691 (drs) | 0.835 (drs) | 0.924 (drs) | 0.926 (drs) | 0.997 (drs) | 0.999 (drs) | 0.990 (irs) |
AA | 0.050 (irs) | 0.060 (irs) | 0.102 (irs) | 0.114 (irs) | 0.143 (irs) | 0.188 (irs) | 0.192 (irs) | 0.312 (irs) | 0.393 (irs) | 0.418 (irs) | |
Yunnan | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 0.371 (drs) | 0.458 (drs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.952 (drs) | 0.980 (irs) | 0.994 (irs) | 0.987 (irs) | 0.978 (irs) |
AA | 0.082 (irs) | 0.018 (irs) | 0.080 (irs) | 0.034 (irs) | 0.072 (irs) | 0.045 (irs) | 0.087 (irs) | 0.137 (irs) | 0.132 (irs) | 0.144 (irs) | |
Shaanxi | BA | 0.525 (drs) | 0.550 (drs) | 0.493 (drs) | 0.801 (drs) | 0.935 (drs) | 0.818 (drs) | 0.957 (drs) | 0.993 (irs) | 0.933 (drs) | 0.991 (irs) |
AA | 0.175 (irs) | 0.172 (irs) | 0.221 (irs) | 0.231 (irs) | 0.229 (irs) | 0.259 (irs) | 0.340 (irs) | 0.406 (irs) | 0.550 (irs) | 0.474 (irs) | |
Gansu | BA | 0.529 (drs) | 0.996 (irs) | 0.924 (irs) | 0.966 (irs) | 0.910 (irs) | 0.987 (drs) | 0.994 (irs) | 0.928 (irs) | 0.914 (irs) | 0.909 (irs) |
AA | 0.024 (irs) | 0.010 (irs) | 0.008 (irs) | 0.016 (irs) | 0.026 (irs) | 0.046 (irs) | 0.045 (irs) | 0.084 (irs) | 0.083 (irs) | 0.109 (irs) | |
Qinghai | BA | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.387 (irs) | 0.590 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.162 (irs) | 0.989 (irs) | 0.490 (irs) |
AA | 0.001 (irs) | 0.011 (irs) | 0.011 (irs) | 0.000 (irs) | 0.006 (irs) | 0.005 (irs) | 0.005 (irs) | 0.001 (irs) | 0.006 (irs) | 0.003 (irs) | |
Ningxia | BA | 0.946 (irs) | 0.999 (crs) | 0.946 (irs) | 0.886 (irs) | 0.641 (irs) | 0.870 (irs) | 0.946 (drs) | 0.839 (irs) | 1.000 (crs) | 0.730 (irs) |
AA | 0.010 (irs) | 0.010 (irs) | 0.011 (irs) | 0.019 (irs) | 0.021 (irs) | 0.030 (irs) | 0.036 (irs) | 0.042 (irs) | 0.042 (irs) | 0.029 (irs) | |
Average value | BA | 0.753 | 0.620 | 0.666 | 0.840 | 0.873 | 0.895 | 0.961 | 0.929 | 0.947 | 0.926 |
AA | 0.254 | 0.255 | 0.302 | 0.315 | 0.362 | 0.369 | 0.411 | 0.473 | 0.553 | 0.556 |
4.2 Regression analysis of SFA in the second stage
In order to separate the efficiency values influenced by external environment and random error factors, this chapter observes the influence of environmental factors and random error, respectively, by constructing similar SFA models in the second stage. SFA regression analysis is carried out by Frontier software. The relaxation values of each input variable obtained in the first stage are taken as dependent variables, and the selected six environmental variables are taken as independent variables to establish regression models to estimate the influence of environmental factors on the relaxation values of each input variable. If the regression coefficient is negative, it indicates that the positive change of environmental variables is conducive to reducing the input redundancy of high-tech industries, thus avoiding the loss and waste of input and improving the efficiency of research and development innovation. On the contrary, it will reduce the efficiency level of R&D innovation. The results of SFA regression analysis are shown in Table 6.
Variable | R&D personnel FTE slack variable | R&D funds slack variable | New product development funds slack variable | Funds for technological transformation slack variable |
---|---|---|---|---|
Constant term | −1.42E + 03*** (−2.97) | −2.94E + 05*** (−39647.79) | −4.14E + 05*** (−241,493.66) | −4.67E + 05*** (−455,599.32) |
Regional real GDP | −3.39E − 01*** (−8.81) | −3.22E + 00 (−0.76) | −9.96E + 00** (−2.08) | −6.61E + 00* (−1.49) |
Geographical position | 1.05E + 03*** (2.23) | 1.38E + 05*** (99,695) | 2.27E + 05*** (215,428) | 5.88E + 04*** (58,524) |
Quality of local laborers | 7.57E − 03*** (11.39) | 3.62E − 01*** (6.34) | 5.16E − 01*** (7.64) | 5.74E − 01*** (7.07) |
Number of high-tech industrial enterprises | −1.15E − 01 (−0.33) | −6.16E + 01*** (−2.8) | −5.64E + 01** (−2.2) | −1.14E + 02*** (−2.1) |
Local government innovation support | 2.30E − 02*** (4.03) | 2.03E + 00*** (4.51) | 2.20E + 00*** (3.81) | 1.59E + 00*** (3.06) |
Number of scientific and technological institutions | 1.58E + 00* (1.45) | −1.64E + 02** (−1.76) | −1.61E + 02* (1.37) | −1.76E + 02** (−2.05) |
σ2 | 2.44E + 07*** | 1.43E + 11*** | 3.21E + 11*** | 4.09E + 11*** |
γ | 7.52E − 01*** | 7.76E − 01*** | 8.46E − 01*** | 9.04E − 01*** |
Logarithmic likelihood function | −2.73E + 03 | −3.98E + 03 | −4.04E + 03 | −4.00E + 03 |
Unilateral likelihood function | 1.41E + 02 | 1.58E + 02 | 2.44E + 02 | 3.47E + 02 |
As can be seen from Table 6, the estimation results
To sum up, environmental variables have significant effects on input redundancy, and their effects are different. Therefore, it is necessary to eliminate the effects of environmental factors and random factors when studying the true level of innovation efficiency.
4.3 DEA empirical analysis and Malmquist index
Using DEAP software again, DEA analysis is conducted based on the original output data and the adjusted input variable data. Based on the results shown in Tables 3–5 (after adjustment), the estimated outcomes are shown in Table 6.
Overall, the efficiency values before and after the adjustment have changed. The adjusted average technical efficiency is 0.25–0.53, the average pure technical efficiency is 0.98–0.96, and the average scale efficiency is 0.254–0.556.Compared with before adjustment, the average value of technical efficiency in different years has decreased, but the average value of pure technical efficiency has increased significantly, while the average value of pure technical efficiency is relatively stable, approaching 1.The average value of scale efficiency has not only dropped significantly, but also there are only two states after the adjustment: increasing scale returns and constant scale returns. This shows that compared with the situation before the adjustment, China’s high-tech industry does not actually have the problems of excessive scale and overcapacity. From a local point of view, the regions where the average value of technical efficiency has increased include Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shandong, Guangdong, and Shaanxi, indicating that the low efficiency of these provinces before adjustment is due to environmental factors. The average value of comprehensive technical efficiency in other regions has decreased, which indicates that the high level of innovation efficiency shown in these regions is mainly influenced by favorable environment and random factors.
In order to further investigate the changes in total factor productivity of China’s high-tech industries, this chapter constructs Malmquist index model based on the DEA model adjusted in the third stage. The results are shown in Tables 7–9. The columns in the table are the index changes for every two consecutive years from 2005 to 2014 and the index changes for the whole period from 2005 to 2014. The last two rows are the arithmetic average and geometric average of the index, respectively. Generally, geometric mean is used to calculate average ratio and average speed, so this chapter uses this value to represent the average growth rate of total factor productivity, technical efficiency index, and technical progress index. Table 10 summarizes Malmquist index and its decomposition index of technological innovation in order to meet the needs of total factor productivity of R&D innovation in various regions in subsequent research.
Provinces | Year | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005/2006 | 2006/2007 | 2007/2008 | 2008/2009 | 2009/2010 | 2010/2011 | 2011/2012 | 2012/2013 | 2013/2014 | 2005/2014 | |
Beijing | 1.144 | 2.691 | 0.999 | 0.958 | 0.952 | 1.049 | 1.181 | 0.871 | 1.087 | 1.141 |
Tianjin | 1.066 | 0.878 | 0.869 | 0.93 | 0.977 | 0.843 | 1.276 | 1.314 | 0.952 | 0.999 |
Hebei | 1.299 | 1.169 | 1.444 | 1.48 | 0.8 | 1.473 | 1.207 | 1.287 | 1.262 | 1.251 |
Shanxi | 2.186 | 2.204 | 0.754 | 1.192 | 1.69 | 1.204 | 1.576 | 1.17 | 0.693 | 1.309 |
Inner Mongolia | 0.556 | 0.8 | 0.565 | 19.297 | 0.534 | 1.56 | 0.771 | 1.589 | 0.977 | 1.191 |
Liaoning | 0.817 | 1.451 | 1.498 | 0.93 | 0.801 | 1.588 | 1.015 | 1.049 | 0.933 | 1.085 |
Jilin | 0.71 | 1.486 | 1.078 | 2.471 | 0.397 | 2.665 | 1.45 | 1.264 | 0.843 | 1.185 |
Heilongjiang | 0.338 | 1.388 | 1.302 | 1.536 | 0.745 | 2.068 | 1.14 | 1.077 | 1.334 | 1.100 |
Shanghai | 1.109 | 0.941 | 1.057 | 0.782 | 0.955 | 1.185 | 1.095 | 0.94 | 1.211 | 1.022 |
Jiangsu | 1.181 | 1.357 | 1.211 | 0.853 | 0.858 | 1.54 | 0.97 | 0.917 | 1.077 | 1.086 |
Zhejiang | 1.275 | 1.115 | 1.048 | 1.61 | 0.689 | 1.541 | 1.178 | 0.979 | 0.851 | 1.107 |
Anhui | 1.191 | 1.113 | 1.193 | 3.639 | 1.006 | 2.247 | 1.214 | 1.054 | 1.147 | 1.388 |
Fujian | 1.009 | 0.999 | 1.01 | 0.894 | 1.088 | 1.078 | 1.02 | 0.939 | 0.937 | 0.995 |
Jiangxi | 0.953 | 1.111 | 1.04 | 1.829 | 1.136 | 1.214 | 1.326 | 1.498 | 1.309 | 1.246 |
Shandong | 1.17 | 1.219 | 1.079 | 1.127 | 0.992 | 1.083 | 0.99 | 0.906 | 0.959 | 1.054 |
Henan | 1.413 | 1.367 | 1.304 | 1.95 | 0.76 | 1.597 | 1.08 | 2.413 | 1.073 | 1.367 |
Hubei | 0.965 | 1.405 | 1.07 | 2.174 | 0.883 | 1.476 | 1.21 | 1.02 | 0.853 | 1.177 |
Hunan | 1.212 | 1.071 | 2.098 | 2.905 | 0.785 | 2.483 | 0.983 | 1.219 | 1.074 | 1.394 |
Guangdong | 1.203 | 1.031 | 0.942 | 1.135 | 1.038 | 1.167 | 0.954 | 1.01 | 1.008 | 1.051 |
Guangxi | 0.592 | 1.408 | 1.191 | 1.963 | 0.601 | 2.802 | 1.253 | 1.314 | 0.895 | 1.191 |
Hainan | 1.002 | 3.76 | 0.529 | 18.576 | 0.354 | 3.899 | 1.534 | 1.082 | 1.051 | 1.647 |
Chongqing | 1.179 | 1.023 | 1.63 | 1.674 | 0.902 | 2.46 | 0.772 | 1.327 | 1.041 | 1.256 |
Sichuan | 1.18 | 1.337 | 0.94 | 1.273 | 0.604 | 1.635 | 1.65 | 0.904 | 1.112 | 1.134 |
Guizhou | 1.704 | 1.517 | 0.933 | 1.707 | 0.957 | 1.185 | 1.474 | 1.102 | 1.197 | 1.278 |
Yunnan | 0.343 | 4.176 | 0.381 | 2.515 | 0.55 | 2.368 | 1.471 | 0.865 | 1.056 | 1.102 |
Shaanxi | 1.017 | 1.284 | 0.996 | 1.105 | 0.929 | 1.678 | 1.107 | 1.239 | 0.792 | 1.104 |
Gansu | 0.699 | 0.734 | 1.9 | 1.925 | 1.369 | 1.216 | 1.744 | 0.872 | 1.306 | 1.225 |
Qinghai | 34.988 | 0.943 | 0.03 | 20.816 | 0.527 | 1.452 | 0.187 | 5.327 | 0.506 | 1.259 |
Ningxia | 1.232 | 1.087 | 1.807 | 1.065 | 1.281 | 1.608 | 1.077 | 1.642 | 0.376 | 1.150 |
Arithmetic average | 2.232 | 1.451 | 1.100 | 3.459 | 0.868 | 1.702 | 1.169 | 1.317 | 0.997 | 1.189 |
Geometry average | 1.117 | 1.317 | 0.946 | 1.922 | 0.820 | 1.596 | 1.107 | 1.202 | 0.967 | 1.182 |
Provinces | Year | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005/2006 | 2006/2007 | 2007/2008 | 2008/2009 | 2009/2010 | 2010/2011 | 2011/2012 | 2012/2013 | 2013/2014 | 2005/2014 | |
Beijing | 1.007 | 2.202 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.955 | 0.967 | 1.083 |
Tianjin | 1 | 0.891 | 0.921 | 1.003 | 1.103 | 0.684 | 1.391 | 1.158 | 0.921 | 0.991 |
Hebei | 0.97 | 1.286 | 1.473 | 1.313 | 1.008 | 1.266 | 1.351 | 1.437 | 1.309 | 1.257 |
Shanxi | 1.878 | 2.314 | 0.7 | 1.157 | 2.015 | 0.952 | 1.675 | 1.319 | 0.683 | 1.294 |
Inner Mongolia | 0.431 | 0.839 | 0.674 | 14.504 | 0.677 | 1.223 | 0.854 | 1.747 | 0.956 | 1.172 |
Liaoning | 0.766 | 1.478 | 1.455 | 0.876 | 0.978 | 1.281 | 1.091 | 1.161 | 0.993 | 1.096 |
Jilin | 0.474 | 1.733 | 1.137 | 2.073 | 0.457 | 2.135 | 1.606 | 1.428 | 0.818 | 1.151 |
Heilongjiang | 0.262 | 1.565 | 1.307 | 1.303 | 1.064 | 1.738 | 1.209 | 1.219 | 1.302 | 1.106 |
Shanghai | 1 | 0.934 | 1.071 | 0.84 | 0.941 | 0.995 | 0.881 | 1.163 | 1.024 | 0.979 |
Jiangsu | 1.13 | 1.355 | 1.059 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.055 |
Zhejiang | 1.173 | 1.21 | 1.042 | 1.316 | 0.865 | 1.273 | 1.251 | 1.094 | 0.907 | 1.115 |
Anhui | 1.135 | 1.119 | 1.127 | 3.239 | 1.476 | 1.927 | 1.29 | 1.181 | 1 | 1.396 |
Fujian | 0.978 | 1.02 | 0.945 | 1.006 | 1.196 | 0.775 | 1.112 | 0.989 | 0.934 | 0.989 |
Jiangxi | 0.772 | 1.165 | 0.988 | 1.836 | 1.245 | 0.934 | 1.5 | 1.706 | 1.337 | 1.231 |
Shandong | 1.084 | 1.244 | 1.045 | 1.166 | 1.009 | 0.931 | 0.989 | 1.015 | 0.969 | 1.046 |
Henan | 1.131 | 1.587 | 1.397 | 1.622 | 1.084 | 1.369 | 1.147 | 1.896 | 1 | 1.331 |
Hubei | 0.655 | 1.536 | 1.047 | 2.13 | 0.994 | 1.183 | 1.331 | 1.154 | 0.841 | 1.146 |
Hunan | 1.082 | 1.146 | 2.123 | 2.691 | 0.965 | 2.131 | 1.063 | 1.329 | 1.074 | 1.411 |
Guangdong | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.000 |
Guangxi | 0.378 | 1.633 | 1.318 | 1.523 | 0.711 | 2.409 | 1.372 | 1.486 | 0.898 | 1.163 |
Hainan | 0.628 | 4.054 | 0.631 | 13.962 | 0.505 | 3.343 | 1.63 | 1.223 | 1.05 | 1.626 |
Chongqing | 1.097 | 1.065 | 1.508 | 1.814 | 0.976 | 1.805 | 0.857 | 1.495 | 1.019 | 1.248 |
Sichuan | 1.128 | 1.361 | 0.834 | 1.439 | 0.764 | 1.328 | 1.49 | 1.043 | 1.068 | 1.134 |
Guizhou | 1.201 | 1.736 | 1.091 | 1.283 | 1.375 | 1.004 | 1.566 | 1.234 | 1.055 | 1.264 |
Yunnan | 0.215 | 4.558 | 0.417 | 2.147 | 0.649 | 1.998 | 1.572 | 0.975 | 1.057 | 1.070 |
Shaanxi | 0.891 | 1.335 | 0.99 | 1.011 | 1.106 | 1.328 | 1.052 | 1.407 | 0.827 | 1.088 |
Gansu | 0.453 | 0.813 | 1.897 | 1.614 | 1.807 | 1.033 | 1.864 | 0.983 | 1.306 | 1.197 |
Qinghai | 21.919 | 1.016 | 0.036 | 15.646 | 0.732 | 1.198 | 0.199 | 6.003 | 0.496 | 1.232 |
Ningxia | 1.039 | 1.094 | 1.65 | 1.162 | 1.423 | 1.226 | 1.148 | 1.853 | 0.375 | 1.131 |
Arithmetic average | 1.616 | 1.527 | 1.099 | 2.851 | 1.039 | 1.395 | 1.224 | 1.436 | 0.972 | 1.172 |
Geometric average | 0.903 | 1.385 | 0.959 | 1.776 | 0.986 | 1.302 | 1.157 | 1.316 | 0.944 | 1.164 |
Provinces | Year | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2005/2006 | 2006/2007 | 2007/2008 | 2008/2009 | 2009/2010 | 2010/2011 | 2011/2012 | 2012/2013 | 2013/2014 | 2005/2014 | |
Beijing | 1.136 | 1.222 | 0.999 | 0.958 | 0.952 | 1.049 | 1.181 | 0.912 | 1.124 | 1.054 |
Tianjin | 1.066 | 0.986 | 0.943 | 0.928 | 0.886 | 1.231 | 0.918 | 1.135 | 1.033 | 1.009 |
Hebei | 1.339 | 0.909 | 0.98 | 1.127 | 0.793 | 1.164 | 0.893 | 0.896 | 0.964 | 0.995 |
Shanxi | 1.164 | 0.953 | 1.077 | 1.03 | 0.839 | 1.265 | 0.941 | 0.887 | 1.015 | 1.011 |
Inner Mongolia | 1.289 | 0.953 | 0.838 | 1.33 | 0.788 | 1.275 | 0.902 | 0.91 | 1.021 | 1.016 |
Liaoning | 1.067 | 0.981 | 1.029 | 1.061 | 0.819 | 1.24 | 0.93 | 0.903 | 0.94 | 0.990 |
Jilin | 1.496 | 0.857 | 0.949 | 1.192 | 0.868 | 1.248 | 0.903 | 0.885 | 1.03 | 1.029 |
Heilongjiang | 1.29 | 0.887 | 0.996 | 1.179 | 0.701 | 1.19 | 0.943 | 0.883 | 1.025 | 0.995 |
Shanghai | 1.109 | 1.008 | 0.987 | 0.931 | 1.015 | 1.191 | 1.243 | 0.809 | 1.183 | 1.044 |
Jiangsu | 1.045 | 1.001 | 1.144 | 0.853 | 0.858 | 1.54 | 0.97 | 0.917 | 1.077 | 1.029 |
Zhejiang | 1.086 | 0.921 | 1.006 | 1.223 | 0.796 | 1.21 | 0.942 | 0.895 | 0.938 | 0.993 |
Anhui | 1.049 | 0.995 | 1.058 | 1.124 | 0.682 | 1.166 | 0.941 | 0.892 | 1.147 | 0.994 |
Fujian | 1.032 | 0.98 | 1.069 | 0.889 | 0.91 | 1.391 | 0.917 | 0.95 | 1.003 | 1.007 |
Jiangxi | 1.235 | 0.953 | 1.052 | 0.996 | 0.912 | 1.299 | 0.884 | 0.878 | 0.979 | 1.012 |
Shandong | 1.08 | 0.98 | 1.033 | 0.966 | 0.983 | 1.163 | 1.001 | 0.893 | 0.99 | 1.007 |
Henan | 1.248 | 0.862 | 0.934 | 1.203 | 0.701 | 1.166 | 0.941 | 1.273 | 1.073 | 1.027 |
Hubei | 1.473 | 0.915 | 1.023 | 1.021 | 0.888 | 1.248 | 0.91 | 0.884 | 1.014 | 1.027 |
Hunan | 1.121 | 0.934 | 0.988 | 1.08 | 0.813 | 1.165 | 0.925 | 0.917 | 1 | 0.988 |
Guangdong | 1.203 | 1.031 | 0.942 | 1.135 | 1.038 | 1.167 | 0.954 | 1.01 | 1.008 | 1.051 |
Guangxi | 1.567 | 0.862 | 0.904 | 1.289 | 0.846 | 1.163 | 0.913 | 0.884 | 0.997 | 1.025 |
Hainan | 1.596 | 0.928 | 0.838 | 1.33 | 0.702 | 1.166 | 0.941 | 0.885 | 1.001 | 1.013 |
Chongqing | 1.075 | 0.96 | 1.081 | 0.923 | 0.924 | 1.363 | 0.901 | 0.888 | 1.021 | 1.006 |
Sichuan | 1.046 | 0.983 | 1.126 | 0.884 | 0.791 | 1.231 | 1.108 | 0.867 | 1.041 | 1.000 |
Guizhou | 1.42 | 0.874 | 0.855 | 1.33 | 0.696 | 1.18 | 0.941 | 0.893 | 1.135 | 1.011 |
Yunnan | 1.596 | 0.916 | 0.913 | 1.171 | 0.847 | 1.185 | 0.936 | 0.888 | 0.998 | 1.030 |
Shaanxi | 1.142 | 0.962 | 1.006 | 1.092 | 0.841 | 1.263 | 1.051 | 0.881 | 0.957 | 1.014 |
Gansu | 1.542 | 0.903 | 1.002 | 1.192 | 0.757 | 1.176 | 0.935 | 0.887 | 1 | 1.023 |
Qinghai | 1.596 | 0.928 | 0.838 | 1.33 | 0.72 | 1.212 | 0.941 | 0.887 | 1.019 | 1.023 |
Ningxia | 1.186 | 0.993 | 1.095 | 0.917 | 0.9 | 1.312 | 0.938 | 0.887 | 1.005 | 1.017 |
Arithmetic average | 1.252 | 0.953 | 0.990 | 1.093 | 0.837 | 1.228 | 0.960 | 0.916 | 1.025 | 1.015 |
Geometry average | 1.237 | 0.951 | 0.986 | 1.082 | 0.831 | 1.225 | 0.957 | 0.913 | 1.024 | 1.015 |
Provinces | TFP | TP | TEC | PTE | SE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Beijing | 1.141 | 1.054 | 1.083 | 1.003 | 1.08 |
Tianjin | 0.999 | 1.008 | 0.991 | 1 | 0.991 |
Hebei | 1.251 | 0.995 | 1.257 | 1 | 1.257 |
Shanxi | 1.309 | 1.011 | 1.294 | 1 | 1.294 |
Inner Mongolia | 1.191 | 1.016 | 1.172 | 1.002 | 1.171 |
Liaoning | 1.085 | 0.99 | 1.096 | 0.994 | 1.102 |
Jilin | 1.184 | 1.029 | 1.151 | 0.996 | 1.156 |
Heilongjiang | 1.101 | 0.995 | 1.106 | 0.999 | 1.107 |
Shanghai | 1.022 | 1.044 | 0.979 | 0.999 | 0.98 |
Jiangsu | 1.086 | 1.029 | 1.055 | 1.002 | 1.053 |
Zhejiang | 1.107 | 0.993 | 1.115 | 1 | 1.114 |
Anhui | 1.388 | 0.994 | 1.395 | 1 | 1.395 |
Fujian | 0.995 | 1.007 | 0.989 | 0.972 | 1.018 |
Jiangxi | 1.246 | 1.012 | 1.231 | 1 | 1.231 |
Shandong | 1.054 | 1.007 | 1.046 | 0.973 | 1.075 |
Henan | 1.367 | 1.027 | 1.331 | 1.002 | 1.328 |
Hubei | 1.177 | 1.027 | 1.146 | 0.992 | 1.155 |
Hunan | 1.394 | 0.988 | 1.41 | 0.997 | 1.415 |
Guangdong | 1.05 | 1.05 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Guangxi | 1.191 | 1.025 | 1.163 | 1 | 1.163 |
Hainan | 1.647 | 1.013 | 1.625 | 1 | 1.625 |
Chongqing | 1.256 | 1.006 | 1.248 | 1.004 | 1.244 |
Sichuan | 1.134 | 1 | 1.134 | 1.006 | 1.128 |
Guizhou | 1.278 | 1.011 | 1.264 | 0.993 | 1.272 |
Yunnan | 1.102 | 1.03 | 1.07 | 1 | 1.071 |
Shaanxi | 1.104 | 1.014 | 1.088 | 0.979 | 1.112 |
Gansu | 1.225 | 1.023 | 1.197 | 1.005 | 1.191 |
Qinghai | 1.26 | 1.023 | 1.232 | 1.003 | 1.229 |
Ningxia | 1.151 | 1.017 | 1.131 | 1.003 | 1.128 |
平均值 | 1.182 | 1.015 | 1.164 | 0.997 | 1.168 |
Generally speaking, the average total factor productivity of R&D innovation in China’s high-tech industries increased from 2005 to 2014, with an increase of 18.2%. Except that the total factor productivity index changes in 2007/2008, 2009/2010, and 2013/2014 are less than 1, the other annual average is greater than 1, which indicates that the innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry is on the rise. Among them, the innovation efficiency in 2008/2009 increased the most, reaching 92.2%, while the innovation efficiency in 2009/2010 decreased the fastest, by 18%.Further according to the decomposed indexes, the pure technical efficiency decreased by 0.003%, while the scale efficiency increased by 16.8%. The increase in scale efficiency offsets the decrease in pure technical efficiency, thus increasing technical efficiency. This shows that the increase in technical innovation efficiency in China’s high-tech industries in recent years is due to the improvement in management level and technical efficiency. In addition, from a local point of view, except for Tianjin, Shanghai, and Fujian, where the total factor productivity has not increased significantly, the total factor productivity in other places has increased by different ranges, with Hainan having the largest growth range, reaching a growth rate of 64.7%. Except Hebei, Liaoning, Heilongjiang, Zhejiang, Anhui, and Hunan, the index of technological progress in other regions showed slow growth, with Beijing having the largest growth rate, with a growth rate of 5.4%.
4.4 Chain multiple mediation effect analysis
In order to clarify the internal mechanism of China’s high-tech industry innovation and “mass entrepreneurship” and find the key to accelerate the process of “double innovation,” this chapter adopts a multichain intermediary effect model to analyze the direct effect and various indirect effects between innovation and entrepreneurship from the overall, regional (east, middle, and west), and local (provinces and cities) perspectives.
4.5 Overall and regional
The overall analysis results of the multiple chain intermediary effect model are shown in Figure 2, and the effect results are shown in Table 11.
Effect path | Calculation | Effect value | |
---|---|---|---|
Indirect | X → M1 → Y | 0.288*** | |
X → M2 → Y | 0.646*** | ||
X → M1 → M2 → Y | 1.005*** | ||
Direct | X → Y | −0.17 | |
Total indirect effect | 1.939 | ||
Total effect | 1.769 |
The analysis results of the east, middle, and west regions are shown in Figure 3 and Table 12.
Region | Direct effect | Indirect effect | Total indirect utility | Total utility | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
East | −1.5** | 1.95*** | 3.942** | 5.5042* | 11.3962 | 9.8962 |
In | 0.093** | 0.288** | 0.4489** | 0.3430** | 1.07994 | 1.17294 |
West | −0.21* | 0.792* | 0.488** | 0.6336** | 1.9136 | 1.7036 |
On the whole, the total effect of innovation on entrepreneurship is 1.769, that is, the increase of total factor productivity is conducive to the increase of the number of new entrepreneurs. However, from a further perspective, the direct effect of innovation on entrepreneurship is shown as inhibition (
From the point of view of the east, middle, and west regions, the total effect of innovation on entrepreneurship is promotion, and the promotion in the east region is obviously stronger than that in the middle and west regions, which may be caused by the superior geographical position and relatively developed economic level of the east region. The direct effects in the east and west are significantly negative, indicating that innovation will play a restraining role in the direct path of entrepreneurship. However, the indirect effects are significantly positive, especially the path in the eastern region, whose influence is much stronger than other paths, which shows that the eastern region mainly promotes entrepreneurship through the path of “innovation → enterprise increase → economic growth → entrepreneurship.” For the central region, whether it is a direct or indirect path, the impact of innovation on entrepreneurship always presents a significant positive effect.
4.6 Provinces, cities, and regions
The analysis results of direct effect, indirect effect, and total effect of innovation on entrepreneurship in various provinces and cities are shown in Table 13.
ID | Province | Direct | Indirect | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Beijing | −6.559 (6.288) | −2.633 (4.822) | ||
2 | Tianjin | −4.307 (3.513) | 3.616 (3.377) | −0.998 (0.615) | |
3 | Hebei | 1.264 (2.751) | 2.260 (4.549) | 1.628 (3.650) | |
4 | Shanxi | −0.406 (1.834) | 1.251 (2.184) | ||
5 | Inner Mongolia | −0.451 (0.180) | 0.303 (0.596) | 0.257 (0.883) | |
6 | Liaoning | −0.680 (0.486) | 2.317 (3.019) | −0.502 (2.617) | −0.418 (0.452) |
7 | Jilin | −4.547 (3.793) | −1.757 (5.084) | ||
8 | Heilongjiang | −0.506 (0.613) | 0.007 (0.264) | −0.014 (0.504) | |
9 | Shanghai | 1.899 (1.190) | 2.565 (4.491) | 1.379 (4.168) | |
10 | Jiangsu | 0.342 (0.337) | −2.641 (5.668) | 0.969 (5.130) | |
11 | Zhejiang | −1.569 (1.558) | 0.370 (2.733) | −0.067 (0.497) | |
12 | Anhui | 0.355 (1.166) | 3.088 (3.405) | 5.097 (3.229) | |
13 | Fujian | 2.330 (4.915) | |||
14 | Jiangxi | 2.282 (1.500) | −2.912 (7.217) | 0.205 (4.388) | |
15 | Shandong | 0.184 (1.825) | −4.029 (10.165) | 3.385 (7.460) | |
16 | Henan | −0.216 (0.557) | 2.915 (1.946) | 2.947 (1.832) | |
17 | Hubei | 0.581 (0.432) | −2.694 (2.279) | −3.573 (2.799) | |
18 | Hunan | 0.309 (0.966) | 3.751 (4.610) | 3.298 (3.883) | |
19 | Guangdong | 9.218 (6.795) | 9.520 (7.017) | ||
20 | Guangxi | −0.333 (0.516) | 1.835 (3.313) | 3.344 (3.186) | |
21 | Hainan | 0.596 (0.799) | 1.846 (1.243) | −1.546 (1.133) | |
22 | Chongqing | 0.326 (0.732) | 6.575 (4.528) | 7.843 (5.252) | |
23 | Sichuan | 0.092 (0.512) | −2.002 (2.406) | 0.041 (1.602) | |
24 | Guizhou | 0.299 (0.949) | −0.035 (0.357) | 2.873 (3.699) | 0.114 (0.767) |
25 | Yunnan | 0.098 (0.624) | −2.534 (4.542) | −0.214 (0.907) | |
26 | Shaanxi | 2.643 (3.316) | −1.189 (5.848) | 2.710 (5.332) | |
27 | Gansu | −0.189 (0.375) | 1.510 (2.146) | −2.794 (2.800) | |
28 | Qinghai | 0.056 (0.049) | 0.206 (0.190) | ||
29 | Ningxia | −0.550 (0.710) | 0.652 (0.917) | 0.186 (1.056) | 0.795 (0.513) |
The direct effects of Beijing, Shanxi, and Jilin are significantly positive, while the direct effects of Yunnan, Hainan, Guangdong, and Fujian are significantly negative, while the direct effects of most other provinces are not significant. On the contrary, in terms of indirect effects, most provinces have significant positive effects, while only Beijing, Shanxi, and Shanghai have negative effects.
5. Conclusions and policy recommendations
This chapter decomposes total factor productivity on the basis of DEA model excluding environment and random factors and then analyzes the influencing process and mechanism among variables by using chain multiple intermediary effect model and further analyzes the relationship between innovation and entrepreneurship in high-tech industries. The research confirms: (1) Before environmental factors and random interference are eliminated, the comprehensive technical efficiency and scale efficiency of R&D in China’s high-tech industry are obviously overestimated, while the pure technical efficiency is underestimated. Therefore, it is necessary to eliminate environmental and random factors and increase the credibility of the research. (2) No matter from the overall or partial analysis, the total effect of innovation on entrepreneurship has always been positive, that is, promoting “people-to-people innovation” is conducive to promoting “mass entrepreneurship.” (3) In most cases, innovation does not directly promote entrepreneurship but indirectly promotes entrepreneurship through a micro–macro combination path.
5.1 Relevant policy recommendations
Generally speaking, the government can encourage China’s high-tech industry to explore new market areas and gain competitive advantages by formulating relevant industrial policies and promoting innovation, thus providing motive force for innovation drive. Through continuous entrepreneurship, innovative achievements will be continuously transformed into real productive forces to promote the sustainable development of high-tech industries and social economy. We should strengthen the combination of “production, study, and research” and focus on improving the “double-creation” mechanism and the “double-creation” environment.
First of all, as the direct effect of innovation on entrepreneurship is positive in Beijing, Shanxi, and Jilin, the government and relevant local departments can appropriately increase the amount of financial allocation for research and development of high-tech products and conquering high-end technologies, strengthen the government’s financial support, and give full play to the policy’s guidance and support for innovation by strengthening the government’s innovation subsidies and tax incentives, thus realizing a “double harvest” of innovation and entrepreneurship on the basis of effectively improving the innovation efficiency of high-tech industries in the region. Secondly, in Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan, and Yunnan, the government should make great efforts to promote the development of other industries while developing high-tech industries, so that the local advantageous industries and characteristic industries can develop continuously and steadily and all kinds of industries will be put together. Thirdly, in Tianjin, Heilongjiang, Zhejiang, Fujian, and Qinghai, the government should actively promote economic development. While making great efforts to improve GDP, it should also pay attention to the per capita level of GDP, scientific and technological content, and green degree and strive to provide a good macroenvironment for promoting “double innovation” by correctly grasping the “three improvements.” Finally, in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shanxi, the number of new high-tech enterprises should be controlled to ensure that a reasonable market structure can not only bring into play economies of scale but also promote effective competition, thus effectively stimulating the improvement of innovation efficiency and entrepreneurship scale.
References
- 1.
Bao GH. Spatial econometric analysis of innovation efficiency and its influencing factors in China’s high-tech industry. Economic Geography. 2014; 6 :100-107 - 2.
Jing H. Research on innovation efficiency of China’s high-tech industry-empirical analysis based on SFA method. Scientific Research. 2010; 3 :467-472 - 3.
Renqiao X, Li Q, Zhongwei C. Research on innovation efficiency of China's high-tech industry and its influencing factors. Management Science. 2012; 5 :85-98 - 4.
Chiu Y, Huang C, Chen Y. The R&D value-chain efficiency measurement for high-tech industries in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 2012; 29 (4):989-1006 - 5.
Kui-Zao D, You-Jin L. The Impact of marketization on innovation efficiency and industry differences-based on the empirical test of China's high-tech industry. Financial Research. 2013; 39 (5):4-16 - 6.
Wu Yanbing R, Stock D. Knowledge function and production efficiency. Economics (Quarterly). 2006; 3 :1129-1156 - 7.
Yanying C, Wenlu Y. Knowledge workers' entrepreneurial entry and R&D incentives for incumbent enterprises-evidence from China's high-tech industry. Scientific Research. 2012; 11 :1707-1714 - 8.
Xiaohong C, Li C, Shujuan M. Study on decision mechanism of imitation entrepreneurship based on high-tech industrial clusters. Scientific Research. 2008; 4 :739-748 - 9.
Chongming W, Yuanhao X. Theoretical construction and empirical analysis of intellectual property entrepreneurship: A multi-case study based on high-tech enterprises. Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition). 2014; 3 :58-70 - 10.
Franco AM, Filson D. Spin-outs: Knowledge diffusion through employee mobility. The Rand Journal of Economics. 2006; 37 (4):841-860 - 11.
Aldrich H, Zimmer C. Entrepreneurship through social networks. The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship. 1986; 22 :3-23 - 12.
Lester RH, Certo ST, Dalton CM. Initial public offering investor valuations: An examination of top management team prestige and environmental uncertainty. Journal of Small Business Management. 2006; 44 (1):1-26 - 13.
Bin C, Xu W, Wang Q. Summary of research on innovation, entrepreneurship and innovation cluster development [J]. Scientific and Technological Progress and Countermeasures. 2014; 9 :157-160 - 14.
Bei J, Xiaoxia X. Entrepreneurship and innovation mechanism of high-tech industry in the United States and its enlightenment. Management World. 2001; 4 :63-70 - 15.
Fried HO. Accounting for environmental effects and statistical noise in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis. 2002; 17 :157-174 - 16.
Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods. 2008; 40 :879-891 - 17.
Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature. 1990; 28 :1661-1707