IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7936-d1145433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Science Parks Promote Companies’ Innovative Performance? Micro Evidence from Shanghai Zhangjiang National Innovation Independent Demonstration Zone

Author

Listed:
  • Minming Wei

    (School of Earth Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

  • Baiyu Dong

    (College of Environment and Resources Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

  • Pingbin Jin

    (School of Earth Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China)

Abstract

Science parks are considered to be key drivers of innovative economic activities and are important tools for countries and regions to achieve sustainable development. However, there still exists controversy about the positive effect of the science parks on the companies’ innovative performance. In this study, we constructed six hypotheses according to previous studies and tested them in the Shanghai Zhangjiang National Innovation Independent Demonstration Zone to answer two major research questions, i.e., (1) “Do science parks promote companies’ innovative performance?” and (2) “What factors in science parks affect the likelihood and intensity of companies’ innovative performance?”. Specifically, we selected 911 companies within the park and 861 companies outside the park using the coarsened exact matching method and applied the zero-inflated negative binomial model to identify the relationship between the company’s presence within the science park and the company’s innovative performance. Then, we applied the Heckman two-step model to further explore the key impact factors affecting the intensity of the innovation activities of the companies in the park. The results confirmed our first hypothesis that science parks can promote companies’ innovative performance. Moreover, we obtained two other findings. First, if a company is located within a science park, it can greatly improve the probability of innovation of that company, but it does not have any significant impact on the intensity. In other words, science parks promote more innovation among companies lacking innovation experience than those with innovation experience. Secondly, the reason why science parks can promote innovation is the knowledge spillover of innovation supporting institutions and high-tech enterprises in the parks, which is limited to a small geographical range. Our study provided new evidence on the positive role of science parks on companies’ innovative performance and offered a valuable sample for the research of science parks in developing countries. In addition, the policy suggestions we raised have reference value for developing countries to take full advantage of science parks to achieve sustainable development of their innovative economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Minming Wei & Baiyu Dong & Pingbin Jin, 2023. "Do Science Parks Promote Companies’ Innovative Performance? Micro Evidence from Shanghai Zhangjiang National Innovation Independent Demonstration Zone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7936-:d:1145433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7936/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7936/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    2. Kuo-Feng Huang & Chwo-Ming Yu & Dah-Hsian Seetoo, 2012. "Firm innovation in policy-driven parks and spontaneous clusters: the smaller firm the better?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 715-731, October.
    3. Francesco Lamperti & Roberto Mavilia & Simona Castellini, 2017. "The role of Science Parks: a puzzle of growth, innovation and R&D investments," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 158-183, February.
    4. Angela Rocio Vasquez-Urriago & Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Modrego Rico, 2016. "Which firms benefit more from being located in a Science and Technology Park? Empirical evidence for Spain," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 107-117.
    5. Christian Rammer & Jan Kinne & Knut Blind, 2020. "Knowledge proximity and firm innovation: A microgeographic analysis for Berlin," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(5), pages 996-1014, April.
    6. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Lamperti, Francesco & Mavilia, Roberto, 2019. "Do science parks sustain or trigger innovation? Empirical evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 140-151.
    7. Katiuscia Lavoratori & Davide Castellani, 2021. "Too close for comfort? Microgeography of agglomeration economies in the United Kingdom," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(5), pages 1002-1028, November.
    8. Danilo Liberati & Marco Marinucci & Giulia Martina Tanzi, 2016. "Science and technology parks in Italy: main features and analysis of their effects on the firms hosted," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 694-729, August.
    9. Qi Yu & Yongchang Wu & Xueyuan Chen & Lin Zhang & Yaowen Liang, 2023. "Do China’s National Agricultural Science and Technology Parks Promote County Economic Development? An Empirical Examination Based on Multi-Period DID Methods," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    10. Siegel, Donald S. & Westhead, Paul & Wright, Mike, 2003. "Assessing the impact of university science parks on research productivity: exploratory firm-level evidence from the United Kingdom," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1357-1369, November.
    11. Min-Ren Yan & Kuo-Ming Chien & Lin-Ya Hong & Tai-Ning Yang, 2018. "Evaluating the Collaborative Ecosystem for an Innovation-Driven Economy: A Systems Analysis and Case Study of Science Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2008. "Science Parks’ tenants versus out-of-Park firms: who innovates more? A duration model," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 45-71, February.
    13. Tangwei Teng & Yi Zhang & Yuefang Si & Jiayi Chen & Xianzhong Cao, 2020. "Government support and firm innovation performance in Chinese science and technology parks: The perspective of firm and sub‐park heterogeneity," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 749-770, June.
    14. Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2009. "Science parks: seedbeds of innovation? A duration analysis of firms’ patenting activity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 169-190, February.
    15. Marisa Ramírez-Alesón & Marta Fernández-Olmos, 2018. "Unravelling the effects of Science Parks on the innovation performance of NTBFs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 482-505, April.
    16. Xie, Kefan & Song, Yu & Zhang, Weiyong & Hao, Jiahui & Liu, Zimei & Chen, Yun, 2018. "Technological entrepreneurship in science parks: A case study of Wuhan Donghu High-Tech Zone," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 156-168.
    17. Rui Torres de Oliveira & Simona Gentile-Lüdecke & Sandra Figueira, 2022. "Barriers to innovation and innovation performance: the mediating role of external knowledge search in emerging economies," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 1953-1974, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge-Gil & Salvador Pérez-Canto & Paolo Landoni, 2023. "The effect of science and technology parks on tenant firms: a literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1489-1531, August.
    2. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & André Spithoven, 2019. "The contribution of science parks: a literature review and future research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 559-595, April.
    3. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Lamperti, Francesco & Mavilia, Roberto, 2019. "Do science parks sustain or trigger innovation? Empirical evidence from Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 140-151.
    4. T. Theeranattapong & D. Pickernell & C. Simms, 2021. "Systematic literature review paper: the regional innovation system-university-science park nexus," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2017-2050, December.
    5. Hülya Ünlü & Serdal Temel & Kristel Miller, 2023. "Understanding the drivers of patent performance of University Science Parks in Turkey," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 842-872, June.
    6. Albahari, Alberto & Pérez-Canto, Salvador & Barge-Gil, Andrés & Modrego, Aurelia, 2017. "Technology Parks versus Science Parks: Does the university make the difference?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 13-28.
    7. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2021. "Perceptual measures of science parks: Tenant firms’ associations between science park attributes and benefits," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. Eduardo Cadorin & Magnus Klofsten & Hans Löfsten, 2021. "Science Parks, talent attraction and stakeholder involvement: an international study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 1-28, February.
    9. Laspia, Alessandro & Sansone, Giuliano & Landoni, Paolo & Racanelli, Domenico & Bartezzaghi, Emilio, 2021. "The organization of innovation services in science and technology parks: Evidence from a multi-case study analysis in Europe," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    10. Alberto Albahari & Magnus Klofsten & Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero, 2019. "Science and Technology Parks: a study of value creation for park tenants," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1256-1272, August.
    11. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2019. "Towards a segmentation of science parks: A typology study on science parks in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 719-732.
    12. Kholekile L. Gwebu & Jeffrey Sohl & Jing Wang, 2019. "Differential performance of science park firms: an integrative model," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 193-211, January.
    13. Fernando Ubeda & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Eva-María Mora-Valentín, 2019. "Do firms located in science and technology parks enhance innovation performance? The effect of absorptive capacity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 21-48, February.
    14. Ng, Wei Keat Benny & Appel-Meulenbroek, Rianne & Cloodt, Myriam & Arentze, Theo, 2022. "Exploring science park location choice: A stated choice experiment among Dutch technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    15. Laura Lecluyse & Mirjam Knockaert & Annelore Huyghe, 2023. "It is not because it is offered that it is used: an investigation into firm-level determinants of use intensity of buffering services in science parks," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 85-104, June.
    16. Klofsten, Magnus & Lundmark, Erik & Wennberg, Karl & Bank, Megan, 2019. "Incubator specialization and size: divergent paths towards operational scale," Ratio Working Papers 326, The Ratio Institute.
    17. Margarida Madaleno & Max Nathan & Henry Overman & Sevrin Waights, 2022. "Incubators, accelerators and urban economic development," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(2), pages 281-300, February.
    18. Eva-María Mora-Valentín & Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado & Juan-José Nájera-Sánchez, 2018. "Mapping the conceptual structure of science and technology parks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1410-1435, October.
    19. Kelsi G. Hobbs & Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2017. "Science and technology parks: an annotated and analytical literature review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 957-976, August.
    20. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge‐Gil & Salvador Pérez‐Canto & Aurelia Modrego, 2018. "The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms' innovation results," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 253-279, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7936-:d:1145433. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.