促进企业基础研发能力提升的政府扶持模式选择——基于经济政策与社会政策的比对

国际贸易摩擦与中国经济发展“新常态”要求中国企业在基础研发方面尽快补齐短板，也要求政府在产业扶持中进一步加强对企业基础研发能力的关注。然而，现有研究尚未清晰地分析经济政策支持与社会政策支持影响企业基础创新能力提升的具体机理，也未明确解释政策扶持范围边界和可能产生的扶持越界。基于158家企业498份问卷数据，应用分层线性模型对研究假设进行检验。结果表明：社会政策支持深入程度对企业基础研发能力提升的影响呈倒U型，容易产生政府扶持越界行为；经济政策支持规范化对企业基础研发能力提升的影响呈倒U型，能明显减少政府扶持越界行为；两种模式各有利弊，二者共同使用必须建立在产业发展阶段、企业客观需要和市场有效参与的基础上。

The Choice of Government Support Mode to Improve the Basic R&D Capability of Enterprises: The Comparison of Economic/Social Support Policy

The new economic situation requires the government to further strengthen the public service function so as to promote the improvement of the basic R&D capacity of Chinese enterprises.In order to promote the transformation of the economy from a capital driven model to an innovation driven model, the government has the obligation to promote the improvement of enterprises' basic research through public services on the medium and macro level, graduallymake up for the defect of Chinese enterprises'basic research and development capability, and improve the internal driving force of innovation in China's economy. Studies have shown that innovation behavior is different from the conventional operation of enterprises, and it involves the path dependence of tacit knowledge development and application so that there is high uncertainty, high complexity and path dependence in innovation implementation. Therefore, enterprise innovation shows a variety of characteristics due to individual differences. The innovation phenomenon in the whole industry is diversified, and the individuality is greater than the commonness. This personalized difference is more prominent in basic research and developed areas. In today's industrial economy of innovation and enterprise (in the case of low technology and high density of labor), the traditional undifferentiated government support, i.e. economic policy support can not fully take into account the individual characteristics of enterprise innovation. So a relatively targeted support model of social policy support evolved. However, even when the two support modes are used together, the practical results of local governments are still not ideal. Many problems in practice, such as excessive government intervention, occur from time to time; some enterprises cheat the government to get subsidies. Therefore, this paper tries to explain the mechanism of the two support modes. Starting from the advantages and disadvantages of economic policy and social policy in government support, this paper summarizes the positive and negative effects caused by different support modes, and then tries to form a new logical framework.#br#　This paper selects manufacturing enterprises, IT enterprises, pharmaceutical enterprises and chemical enterprises as initial samples for screening and analysis. Based on 498 questionnaires from 158 enterprises, the hierarchical linear model is used to test the hypotheses.The stduy verifies the hypothesis by defining variables and builds a cross-hierarchical regression model.#br#　The research has the following findings.（1）The depth of social policy support has an inverted U-shaped effect on the improvement of enterprises' basic R&D capability, but it is easy to provide support beyond the boundary.（2）The normalization of economic policy support has an inverted U-shaped effect on enterprise innovation, but it can significantly reduce the phenomenon of support crossing the boundary. （3）The two modes have their own advantages and disadvantages, and their common use must be based on the industrial development stage, the objective needs of enterprises and the effective participation of the market.#br#　Taking the theory of government regulation and the theory of government-market relationship as theoretical clues, this paper is different from previous literature and examines the support situation of enterprise basic R&D in the micro context and takes industrial characteristics as the situational factor to re-examine and test the rationality of the "carrot and stick" view. The research results of this paper provides guiding significancefor government. Firstly, the supportive policies and measures in social support should abide by the supportive boundary. There are certain constraints on the public service function of the government. In order to ensure the play of market mechanism, the local government should not intervene excessively in planning and promoting enterprise innovation. Secondly, an information disclosure mechanism combining enterprise, market and government has been formed, which slows down the rigidity of economic policy support. In the implementation process of economic policy support in the future,theinformation disclosure platform should be established to reflect enterprise demand and market conditions. Finally, according to the industry characteristics, the government should improve the dynamic and pluralistic role of policy support, and be able to choose the appropriate support mode dynamically and diversely to prevent the occurrence of support disutility.#br#