IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i11p1164-d668933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban Innovation Efficiency Improvement in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area from the Perspective of Innovation Chains

Author

Listed:
  • Wenzhong Ye

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Hunan University of Science and Technology (HNUST), Xiangtan 411201, China)

  • Yaping Hu

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Hunan University of Science and Technology (HNUST), Xiangtan 411201, China)

  • Lingming Chen

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Hunan University of Science and Technology (HNUST), Xiangtan 411201, China
    Department of Economics & Statistics, School of Economics and Management, Xinyu University (XYU), Xinyu 338004, China)

Abstract

Against the background of globalization and informatization, innovation is the primary driving force for regional economic and social development. Urban agglomerations are the main body of regional participation in global competition, and promoting the construction of the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area is an important strategy for China’s regional economic development. Aimed at the differences in location advantages among cities in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area, based on the theory of innovation chain, we developed a three-stage model of “knowledge innovation-scientific research innovation-product innovation”. A three-stage DEA model was used to measure the innovation efficiency of cities in the Greater Bay Area at different stages, and two progressive two-dimensional matrices are constructed to locate the innovation development of cities according to the efficiency value. The results show the following: ① The overall innovation efficiency of the Greater Bay Area urban agglomerations gradually decreased in the process from knowledge innovation and scientific research innovation to product innovation, and the innovation efficiency among cities was unbalanced. ② Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and Hong Kong all performed well in the whole innovation stage, while other cities in the Greater Bay Area showed weakness in innovation at different stages. Based on this, this paper puts forward relevant countermeasures and suggestions for promoting and optimizing collaborative innovation in the Greater Bay Area taking into account factor flow, industrial structure, and innovation network of urban agglomerations.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenzhong Ye & Yaping Hu & Lingming Chen, 2021. "Urban Innovation Efficiency Improvement in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area from the Perspective of Innovation Chains," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1164-:d:668933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1164/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1164/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    2. Roper, Stephen & Du, Jun & Love, James H., 2008. "Modelling the innovation value chain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 961-977, July.
    3. Jian-Wen Fang & Yung-ho Chiu, 2017. "Research on Innovation Efficiency and Technology Gap in China Economic Development," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(02), pages 1-22, April.
    4. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2011. "Determinants of the Efficiency of Regional Innovation Systems," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(7), pages 905-918.
    5. Rametsteiner, Ewald & Hansen, Eric & Niskanen, Anssi, 2006. "Introduction to the special issue on innovation and entrepreneurship in the forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(7), pages 669-673, October.
    6. Astrid Cullmann & Jens Schmidt-Ehmcke & Petra Zloczysti, 2009. "Innovation, R&D Efficiency and the Impact of the Regulatory Environment: A Two-Stage Semi-Parametric DEA Approach," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 883, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Ghebremichael, Asghedom & Potter-Witter, Karen, 2009. "Effects of tax incentives on long-run capital formation and total factor productivity growth in the Canadian sawmilling industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 85-94, March.
    8. Nasierowski, W. & Arcelus, F. J., 2003. "On the efficiency of national innovation systems," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 215-234, September.
    9. Maudos, Joaquin & Pastor, Jose Manuel & Serrano, Lorenzo, 1999. "Total factor productivity measurement and human capital in OECD countries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 39-44, April.
    10. H. Fried & C. Lovell & S. Schmidt & S. Yaisawarng, 2002. "Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 157-174, January.
    11. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    12. Seema Sharma & V. J. Thomas, 2008. "Inter-country R&D efficiency analysis: An application of data envelopment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(3), pages 483-501, September.
    13. Yanwen Sheng & Jinli Zhao & Xuebo Zhang & Jinping Song & Yi Miao, 2019. "Innovation efficiency and spatial spillover in urban agglomerations: A case of the Beijing‐Tianjin‐Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta, and the Pearl River Delta," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 1280-1310, December.
    14. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn & Emilie Rovito, 2008. "A new approach to measuring technology with an application to the shape of the diffusion curves," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 187-207, April.
    15. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Streimikiene, Dalia & Jusoh, Ahmad & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A comprehensive review of data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach in energy efficiency," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1298-1322.
    16. Batz, Franz-J. & Janssen, Willem & Peters, Kurt J., 2003. "Predicting technology adoption to improve research priority--setting," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 151-164, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iwona Cieślak & Andrzej Biłozor & Luca Salvati, 2022. "Land as a Basis for Recent Progress in the Study of Urbanization Dynamics," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-4, January.

    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. Stepan Zemtsov & Maxim Kotsemir, 2019. "An assessment of regional innovation system efficiency in Russia: the application of the DEA approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 375-404, August.
    2. Maxim Kotsemir, 2013. "Measuring national innovation systems efficiency – a review of DEA approach," HSE Working papers WP BRP 16/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Ibrahim Alnafrah, 2021. "Efficiency evaluation of BRICS’s national innovation systems based on bias-corrected network data envelopment analysis," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-28, December.
    4. Vitor Miguel Ribeiro & Celeste Varum & Ana Dias Daniel, 2021. "Introducing microeconomic foundation in data envelopment analysis: effects of the ex ante regulation principle on regional performance," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1215-1244, September.
    5. Jianping Liu & Kai Lu & Shixiong Cheng, 2018. "International R&D Spillovers and Innovation Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Chen Kaihua & Kou Mingting, 2014. "Staged efficiency and its determinants of regional innovation systems: a two-step analytical procedure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 52(2), pages 627-657, March.
    7. Xionghe Qin & Debin Du & Mei-Po Kwan, 2019. "Spatial spillovers and value chain spillovers: evaluating regional R&D efficiency and its spillover effects in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 721-747, May.
    8. Alessandro Fiorini, 2016. "Technical efficiency in a technological innovation system perspective: The case of bioenergy technologies R&D resources mobilisation in a sample from EU-28," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 107-127.
    9. M. Foddi & S. Usai, 2012. "Regional innovation performance in Europe," Working Paper CRENoS 201221, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    10. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    11. Changhong Zhao & Haonan Zhang & Yurong Zeng & Fengyun Li & Yuanxin Liu & Chengju Qin & Jiahai Yuan, 2018. "Total-Factor Energy Efficiency in BRI Countries: An Estimation Based on Three-Stage DEA Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Tom Broekel & Nicky Rogge & Thomas Brenner, 2018. "The innovation efficiency of German regions – a shared-input DEA approach," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 38(1), pages 77-109, February.
    13. Kai Xu & Bart Bossink & Qiang Chen, 2019. "Efficiency Evaluation of Regional Sustainable Innovation in China: A Slack-Based Measure (SBM) Model with Undesirable Outputs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Pawel Dobrzanski & Sebastian Bobowski, 2020. "The Efficiency of R&D Expenditures in ASEAN Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, March.
    15. Guan, Jiancheng & Chen, Kaihua, 2012. "Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 102-115.
    16. Martina Halaskova & Beata Gavurova & Kristina Kocisova, 2020. "Research and Development Efficiency in Public and Private Sectors: An Empirical Analysis of EU Countries by Using DEA Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    17. Vladimír Holý & Karel Šafr, 2018. "Are economically advanced countries more efficient in basic and applied research?," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(4), pages 933-950, December.
    18. Jiancheng Guan & Kairui Zuo, 2014. "A cross-country comparison of innovation efficiency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 541-575, August.
    19. Chia-Chin Chang, 2015. "Influences of knowledge spillover and utilization on the NIS performance: a multi-stage efficiency perspective," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1945-1967, September.
    20. Marta Foddi & Stefano Usai, 2013. "Regional Knowledge Performance in Europe," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 258-286, 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:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1164-:d:668933. 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.