日本产学官合作制度的纵向解析:演进逻辑、内在特征与运行困境

A Longitudinal Analysis of the Japanese Industry-university-government Cooperation System:Development Logic,Basic Characteristics and Operational Dilemmas

产学研融合作为增强国家与区域技术创新能力的主要战略途径,被各国、各地区视为整合优化科技资源配置、提升科技创新效率以及带动科技人才培育的重要举措。日本自以制度化推进产学官合作以来,面对各发展阶段的国际竞争压力与自身发展阻碍,中央政府在提升国家科技创新能力的利益驱动下型塑着产学官合作制度的发展方向,并在多元主体的协作实施下推动产学官合作制度以渐进性变迁路径和强制性变迁模式持续演进。基于理性制度选择主义纵向解析日本产学官合作制度的演进逻辑发现,日本产学官合作制度始终遵循“知识增量—科技创新—经济发展”的制度理念,将创建良好的政策环境以引导组织行为作为制度目标,并将提升关键主体的耦合程度视为制度重点。但同时,在制度设计层面存在相对忽视地方政府职能、在制度推进过程中中央政府过多干预以及在制度落实中多元主体跨界壁垒持续阻碍的问题。

As a major strategic way to enhance national and regional technological innovation capabilities,the integration of industry-university-research is regarded by countries and regions as an important initiative to integrate and optimize the allocation of scientific and technological resources.It enhances the efficiency of scientific and technological innovation,and drives the cultivation of scientific and technological talents.Since the institutionalization of industry-university-government cooperation in Japan,the central government has been shaping the development direction of the industry-university-government cooperation system in the face of international competitive pressures and its own development obstacles at various stages of development.Driven by the interest of enhancing the country's scientific and technological innovation capacity,and driven by the collaborative implementation of multiple actors,the industry-university-government cooperation system has continued to evolve in a gradual change path and mandatory change mode.A vertical analysis of the evolutionary logic of the Japanese industry-university-government cooperation system reveals that the Japanese system has always followed the institutional concept of knowledge increment-science and technology innovation-economic development.It makes creation of a favourable policy environment to guide organizational behaviour as the institutional objective and the enhancement of the coupling of key players as the institutional focus.However,there is a relative neglect of local government functions at system design,too much central government intervention in the process of system promotion,and persistent barriers to cross-border implementation by multiple subjects.