加强企业核心竞争力之探析

核心竞争力是企业竞争能力的基础,培育企业核心竞争力既离不开技术创新,又离不开制度创新。技术创新是培育企业核心竞争力的内核,而制度创新是技术创新的前提和保证,兼顾两种创新方式才能最终获得企业竞争优势。     

论GIS在社会经济领域中的运用

地理信息系统是一种新兴的技术工具,它不仅被应用在现代测绘、军事国防、野外数据采集等自然科学方面,而且被广泛应用在社会经济领域中,在管理和决策中具有重要的作用.随着人类获取空间数据能力的不断提高和信息技术的发展,地理信息系统的应用将提升到一个新的深度和广度,它将在国民经济信息化中发挥重要的作用.本文介绍地理信息系统的基本概念及其在经济、管理、法律等领域中的应用实例,着重强调在社会经济领域中开展地理信息系统应用研究的意义.     

企业技术创新过程模型研究——基于供应商和用户共同参与的模式

创新是一个民族的素质体现,也是企业发展不变的主题.随着科学技术日益复杂化,技术创新在企业中的重要作用也日益凸显.时于企业来说,技术创新是帮助其在激烈竞争中保持优势的基础,只有进行技术创新,提升自身竞争力,才能让新技术及新产品赶上市场需求潮流,让企业在竞争中立于不败之地.企业创新过程能够为企业的创新指明一条道路,但是现如今企业不能仅仅依靠企业自身采进行创新,而应该借助各方面的力量,让用户和供应商一起参与到技术创新过程中来.有研究表明,供应商和用户参与到新产品开发过程中,能为企业提高新产品开发效率提供有效帮助.但是用户和供应商参与到创新中,技术创新过程又会是怎样一种情况?本文将从这个角度出发,在分别修正已有的供应商和用户单独参与汽车企业技术创新过程模型的基础上,模拟归纳出二者共同参与的技术创新过程模型,为企业新形势下的创新提供帮助.     

生产者视角下军民融合技术成果转化关键问题研究——基于知识网络案例分析

军民融合发展已上升为国家战略,在科技领域,军民融合技术成果转化是实现军民融合发展的重要途径。由于军民融合技术的特殊性,现有军民融合技术成果转化效率不高。在现有研究中,鲜有以理论模型为依据,系统解析军民融合技术成果转化全流程核心问题。知识网络模型是分析多要素参与复杂过程的有效方法,可用来分析多要素参与的军民融合技术成果转化过程。基于军民融合技术成果转化涉及的信息、技术、资本、人力、组织和社会环境6个要素,构建军民融合技术成果转化知识网络模型,采用该模型进行案例分析,指出现阶段军民融合技术成果转化存在的问题。研究结论对于推动我国军民融合创新技术成果转化、加快军民融合创新发展具有重要现实意义。     

营商环境、企业家精神与技术创新关系研究

优化营商环境、激发市场主体活力是我国新时期推动经济高质量发展的重大举措。选取2009-2018年30个省市级面板数据,构建中介效应模型,实证分析营商环境质量对企业家精神的激励效应及技术创新的促进作用。研究发现：①营商环境优化对中国技术创新具有显著正效应,但其影响更多表现为资金供给而非制度供给;②企业家精神是营商环境与技术创新的中介变量,营商环境要素、企业家创新精神和创业精神激励结构对技术创新的影响存在异质性;③营商环境显性激励作用明显,但内生激励不足。研究结论可为持续优化营商环境、激发企业家精神、促进技术创新提供政策启示。     

技术进步偏向、创新要素配置与经济韧性

基于2006—2020年中国内地31个省域面板数据,从影响传导机制、非线性特质角度探究技术进步偏向对经济韧性的影响效应。结果发现：(1)技术进步偏向对经济韧性具有显著正向影响,这一结论在稳健性与内生性检验中依然成立;(2)就作用机制而言,创新要素配置是影响技术进步偏向作用于经济韧性的重要机制;(3)门槛模型检验结果显示,技术进步偏向指数及其子维度与经济调整适应能力不存在非线性作用关系,但与经济创新转型能力具有非线性关系。因此,要合理引导技术发展方向,发挥技术进步偏向的积极作用;充分发挥“有效市场”和“有为政府”的合力作用,优化创新要素配置;以技术创新、理念革新与机制鼎新抵御潜在风险,增强经济韧性。     

Technology evaluation in Taiwan's technology industries: Strategies, trajectories, and innovations

Technology evaluation, as an organizational process, is the essential ability to comprehend the values of technologies very soon after they emerge. Meanwhile, the technology evaluation process is inevitably influenced by the firm's industrial context, such as its technological trajectory. This study defines technology evaluation strategy in terms of the processes, methods, and participants involved, and uses this definition as a taxonomy to explore different types of technology evaluation strategies. A survey on the technological industries is conducted to explore types of technology evaluation strategies and their relationships with the advantages of different types of innovation under the effects of different technological trajectories. The survey identifies four types of technology evaluation strategies, namely, those of the flexible executive strategist, the emergent executive intuitionist, the deliberate quantitative strategist, and the deliberate consensual strategist, are identified. This study has found that certain types of technology evaluation strategies have better innovation performances than the others. The patterns of technological trajectories are also found to influence a firm's technology evaluation strategy and the advantages of certain types of innovations. The established explanations of the relationships among the technological trajectory, innovation type, and technology evaluation strategies may guide technology businesses to develop a better technology evaluation capability. The theoretical framework developed in this research enriches the strategic management literature with a new taxonomy for technology evaluation strategies.     

Does Technological Innovation Really Reduce Marginal Abatement Costs? Some Theory,Algebraic Evidence,and Policy Implications

The existing literature models innovation in pollution control as a reduction in marginal abatement costs. We show that this assumption is inappropriate for production process innovations such as fuel switching. Algebraically, we examine the effects of different innovation types on marginal abatement cost curves, showing that some desirable innovations increase marginal abatement costs. Empirically, we estimate marginal abatement costs for sulfur dioxide by measuring the output distance function for electric power in Korea. Regression results confirm that production process innovations did raise marginal abatement costs in this case. One policy implication: economic instruments do not always provide stronger innovation incentives than command-and-control policies.      

Vertical Innovation and Catching-Up: Implications of EU Integration for CEECs-5

We analyze the role of vertical innovation in trade patterns for developing economies trading with technologically advanced countries. A model is presented where the international diffusion of knowledge, promoted by economic integration, is the source of a technological catching up and leads to a convergence in the quality of traded goods, with a positive effect on exports. We then turn our attention on the evolution of trade between the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs-5) and their European Union partner countries, assessing whether economic integration has increase the quality of the goods produced. For the period 1995–2005, we find evidence of the increasing role of intra-industry trade and vertical differentiation and a process of specialization in higher quality products, especially in the medium- and high-skill sectors.

Capital–skill complementarity and inequality: A sensitivity analysis

Krusell et al. in [Krusell, P., Ohanian, L., Ríos-Rull, J.V., Violante, G.L., 2000. Capital–skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis. Econometrica 68 (5), 1029–1053] analyzed the capital–skill complementarity hypothesis as an explanation for the behavior of the US skill premium. We refit Krusell et al.'s [Krusell, P., Ohanian, L., Ríos-Rull, J.V., Violante, G.L., 2000. Capital–skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis. Econometrica 68 (5), 1029–1053] model with two alternative capital equipment price series: One proposed by Greenwood et al. [Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., Krusell, P., 1997. Long-run implications of investment-specific technological change. Amer. Econ. Rev. 87 (3), 342–362] and the official, revised National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) data. We find that capital–skill complementarity is preserved, but other results were sensitive to the data used. Specifically, the fit of the model was similar to Krusell et al.'s [Krusell, P., Ohanian, L., Ríos-Rull, J.V., Violante, G.L., 2000. Capital–skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis. Econometrica 68 (5), 1029–1053] using the NIPA data, but not the Greenwood et al. [Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., Krusell, P., 1997. Long-run implications of investment-specific technological change. Amer. Econ. Rev. 87 (3), 342–362] data. Also, both series produce estimates of the elasticity of substitution between unskilled labor and equipment that are substantially larger than Krusell et al.'s [Krusell, P., Ohanian, L., Ríos-Rull, J.V., Violante, G.L., 2000. Capital–skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis. Econometrica 68 (5), 1029–1053] estimates.