创新型城市试点政策与中国城市创新“量增质降”困境

Innovative City Pilot Policy and Dilemma of“Increasing Quantity and Reducing Quality”of Urban Innovation in China

基于专利知识复杂度的视角,测度了中国266个地级市的创新质量,并运用多期双重差分法实证分析了创新型城市试点政策对城市创新的影响。研究发现:中国城市创新呈“量增质降”特征,但地区分化趋势明显;创新型城市试点政策促进了城市创新数量增长,但却抑制了创新质量提升,且上述影响呈逐年加深态势。异质性分析发现,创新型城市试点政策降低了创新多样性,提高了创新遍在性,对发明专利的提升作用弱于其他专利,对一、二线城市创新数量和其他城市创新质量的影响不显著。机制分析显示,创新型城市试点政策通过强化政府创新投入、激励城市创业和加强人才引进扭曲了创新政策效果,从而导致城市创新陷入“量增质降”困境。未来应持续完善创新质量评价方法,着力构筑多元化创新投入体系,因地制宜实施创新政策和考核体系,加快突破创新困境。

Based on the perspective of patent knowledge complexity,this paper measures the innovation quality of 266 prefecture-level cities in China,and analyzes the impact of innovative city pilot policy on urban innovation by using heterogeneous timing DID method.The study indicates that the urban innovation in China has the characteristics of“increasing quantity and reducing quality”,but the trend of regional heterogeneity is obvious.The innovative city pilot policy promotes the growth of urban innovation quantity,but inhibits the improvement of innovation quality,and the above impact is deepening year by year.Heterogeneity analyses show that the innovative city pilot policy reduces the diversity of innovation and improves the ubiquity of innovation.The promotion effect on inventive patents is weaker than that of other patents,and has no significant impact on the quantity of innovation in first and second tier cities and the quality of innovation in other cities.Mechanism analyses reveal that the innovative city pilot policy distorts the effect of innovation policy through strengthening government innovation investment,encouraging urban entrepreneurship and strengthening talent introduction,which leads to the dilemma of“increasing quantity and reducing quality”of urban innovation.In the future,it is necessary to focus on improving innovation quality evaluation methods,developing diversified innovation input systems,implementing innovation policies and assessment systems that are suited to local conditions,and accelerating breakthroughs in innovation dilemma.