Indexing innovation within China

Abstract

Purpose Performed over a five-year time horizon, this paper aims to analyze the progression rates of technological innovation across 15 sub-provincial Chinese cities. The authors quantify and rate innovation performance, then rank the cities based on a purpose-built index designed to gauge the rate of technological progress. Design/methodology/approach Using the inferior constraint method, and a variety of national sources of data, the authors construct an innovation index based in part on new product sales revenue, proportion of college students, research and development expenditure of industrial enterprises in relation to gross industrial output value, contract deals in technical markets per capita, hazard-free treatment rate of waste, enterprises with technical development agencies accounts for industrial enterprises, number of high-tech enterprises and invention patent ownership per million population. Findings The findings provide a methodology for indexing cities, with 15 Chinese provincial cities as examples. Among the top five cities with the highest technological innovation index were Shenzhen, Nanjing, Guangzhou, Hangzhou and Wuhan. In the bottom were Shenyang, Changchun, Dalian, Xi’an and Harbin. Research limitations/implications This study applied a new model of innovation at the city level for China. Application to other industries (real estate, manufacturing, etc.) and countries will extend boundaries of this model and show its wider applicability. Practical implications Companies can use this research and methodology when seeking new investments in high tech and innovative products. Locations offering more hospitable environments should be prioritized ceteris paribus. Originality/value One weakness of much of the international business and competitiveness literature is that it often views the country as the primary unit of analysis. In this way, nuanced views of the institutional environments within countries are often overlooked. This paper proposes a measure of regional rates of innovativeness across China.

Does Innovation Efficiency Suppress the Ecological Footprint? Empirical Evidence from 280 Chinese Cities

“…In addition, China’s regional innovation efficiency is characterized by heterogeneity and agglomeration [ 35 ]. Moreover, the innovation efficiency of provinces in China declines from east to west [ 36 , 37 ]. Therefore, innovation efficiency may have a heterogeneous impact on the ecological footprint of different regions; however, previous or current research has not fully resolved this issue.…”

Employee well-being and innovativeness: A multi-level conceptual framework based on citation network analysis and data mining techniques

“…The authors create a framework and use it as a guide to empirically investigate variations in innovation intensity at the national level [137]. The regional factors of innovativeness have been investigated in countries such as Germany [138], China [139], and Poland [140]. The final cluster we discuss is Cluster 10, which focuses on policy innovativeness at the state level ("state" is the most frequently used keyword in this cluster).…”

Does Technological Innovation Reduce Environmental Degradation? Evidence from China

“…(Hang & Yuan-Sheng, 2011) have discovered the influence of technological progress on CO2 emissions in China from 1980 to 2006 and this influence is found to be positive in the early stages but harmful in the later stages. Owing to absence of spending on research and development (R&D), technological improvements may impair environmental quality, preventing the ideal level from being achieved (Cheng et al, 2019;Gu & Wang, 2018;Kivyiro & Arminen, 2014;Reid et al, 2019;Yongping, 2011). However, by employing ARDL and VAR models and using data from 1971 to 2014, (Zhang, 2021) has found that energy and technological innovation, particularly in China's metropolitan areas, are critical for lowering environmental deterioration (Chu, 2022) has conducted a study and looked at how the ecological footprints of 20 OECD countries were affected by environmental technology.…”