IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i10p4563-d1657426.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Value Network Co-Creation Mechanism of a High-Tech Park from the Perspective of Knowledge Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Li Qu

    (Business School, Beijing Information Science and Technology University, Beijing 100192, China)

  • Hanxi Zheng

    (Business School, Beijing Information Science and Technology University, Beijing 100192, China)

  • Yueting Liu

    (China Association for Quality, Beijing 100048, China)

Abstract

The value network of the high-tech park constitutes a value co-creation system where multiple entities facilitate knowledge transformation through interaction, thereby achieving collaborative innovation. The reasonable distribution of collaborative innovation benefits among various innovation entities is a critical factor in maintaining the motivation for innovation within the value network. This study examines the co-creation mechanism of the value network in high-tech parks from the perspective of knowledge innovation, with the aim of enhancing the efficiency of knowledge transfer and spillover among entities. Additionally, it seeks to establish a fairer and more rational benefit distribution framework to promote collaborative innovation and ensure the stable operation of the value network. Firstly, we identify the entities involved in value co-creation within the high-tech park. Subsequently, we analyze the roles and interrelationships of these entities within the value co-creation network. We determine the knowledge flow pathways by employing the shortest path method, and innovatively construct an MMPP/M/C queuing model to depict the processes of knowledge transfer and spillover among the entities engaged in value co-creation. We optimize and solve the queuing model using the matrix geometric method, deriving metrics such as the average queue length, average arrival rate, average waiting time, and service intensity under the steady state of the system, and verify the applicability and effectiveness of the model in the application of the high-tech park through empirical data. Finally, by integrating the improved Shapley value method, a benefit distribution model is constructed that incorporates five types of factors: contribution level, resource input, knowledge spillover effect, effort level, and risk undertaking. The rationality and operability of this model are validated through computational examples. Research findings indicate that the optimized queuing model enhances the efficiency of knowledge transfer and spillover among entities, while the refined benefit distribution mechanism effectively compensates entities with high contribution levels, substantial resource inputs, significant knowledge spillover effects, elevated effort levels, and high risk assumption levels. This provides both theoretical support and practical guidance for sustaining the long-term stable operation of the value network.

Suggested Citation

  • Li Qu & Hanxi Zheng & Yueting Liu, 2025. "Value Network Co-Creation Mechanism of a High-Tech Park from the Perspective of Knowledge Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-33, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4563-:d:1657426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4563/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4563/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiangyang Zhou & Liang Chi & Jiaxuan Li & Liwei Xing & Lu Yang & Jianzhai Wu & Han Meng, 2024. "A Study on Revenue Distribution of Chinese Agricultural E-Commerce Supply Chain Based on the Modified Shapley Value Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-17, October.
    2. David B. Audretsch & Maksim Belitski & Farzana Chowdhury, 2024. "Knowledge investment and search for innovation: evidence from the UK firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1387-1410, August.
    3. Monjon, Stephanie & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2003. "Assessing spillovers from universities to firms: evidence from French firm-level data," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1255-1270, November.
    4. Judith Timmer & Peter Borm & Stef Tijs, 2004. "On three Shapley-like solutions for cooperative games with random payoffs," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 32(4), pages 595-613, August.
    5. Alonso Pedrero, Raquel & Pisciella, Paolo & Crespo del Granado, Pedro, 2024. "Fair investment strategies in large energy communities: A scalable Shapley value approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 295(C).
    6. Trunina, Anna & Ashourizadeh, Shayegheh, 2021. "Business model-network interactions: Comparative case studies from Zhongguancun and Silicon Valley," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13785 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Changwen Li & Bin Cao & Yong-Wu Zhou & T. C. Edwin Cheng, 2023. "Pricing, coalition stability, and profit allocation in the pull assembly supply chains under competition," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 45(3), pages 977-1011, September.
    9. Yona Elbaum & Alexander Novoselsky & Evgeny Kagan, 2022. "A Queueing Model for Traffic Flow Control in the Road Intersection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Kai Zhang & Haishu Lu & Bin Wang, 2024. "Benefit Distribution Mechanism of a Cooperative Alliance for Basin Water Resources from the Perspective of Cooperative Game Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-33, August.
    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. Maria De Paola & Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2018. "Are Men Given Priority for Top Jobs? Investigating the Glass Ceiling in Italian Academia," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(3), pages 475-503.
    2. Donald Nganmegni Njoya & Issofa Moyouwou & Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga, 2021. "The equal-surplus Shapley value for chance-constrained games on finite sample spaces," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 93(3), pages 463-499, June.
    3. Erika Raquel Badillo & Rosina Moreno, 2018. "Does absorptive capacity determine collaboration returns to innovation? A geographical dimension," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 60(3), pages 473-499, May.
    4. Yongzhong Yang & Mohsin Shafi, 2020. "How does customer and supplier cooperation in micro-enterprises affect innovation? Evidence from Pakistani handicraft micro-enterprises," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(5), pages 530-559, November.
    5. Hans Gersbach & Ulrich Schetter & Maik T. Schneider, 2021. "Macroeconomic Rationales For Public Investments In Science," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(2), pages 575-599, April.
    6. Konrad Kubacki, 2013. "Wpływ współpracy przedsiębiorstw z sektorem naukowo-badawczym na innowacyjność firm notowanych na GPW w Warszawie oraz NewConnect," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 5-6, pages 97-121.
    7. Broström, Anders & Lööf, Hans, 2006. "What do we know about Firms’ Research Collaboration with Universities? New Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 74, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    8. Mahmut Yaşar & Catherine Paul, 2012. "Firm performance and knowledge spillovers from academic, industrial and foreign linkages: the case of China," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 237-253, December.
    9. Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2013. "The role of proximity in university-business cooperation for innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 93-115, April.
    10. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    11. A. Lasagni, 2011. "European SMEs, external relationships and innovation: some empirical evidence," Economics Department Working Papers 2011-EP04, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    12. Silvye Ane Massaini & Fábio Lotti Oliva, 2015. "Innovation Networks: the Contribution of Partnerships to Innovative Performance of Firms in The Brazilian Electrical-Electronics Industry," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 12(3), pages 16-41, May.
    13. Judith Timmer, 2006. "The Compromise Value for Cooperative Games with Random Payoffs," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 64(1), pages 95-106, August.
    14. Malo, Stéphane, 2009. "The contribution of (not so) public research to commercial innovations in the field of combinatorial chemistry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 957-970, July.
    15. Isabel Freitas & Tommy Clausen & Roberto Fontana & Bart Verspagen, 2011. "Formal and informal external linkages and firms’ innovative strategies. A cross-country comparison," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-119, February.
    16. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2007. "Search Patterns and Absorptive Capacity: A Comparison of Low- and High-Technology Firms from Thirteen European Countries," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-062, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hottenrott, Hanna, 2012. "Collaborative R&D as a strategy to attenuate financing constraints," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-049, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 275-314, Elsevier.
    19. Comin, Diego & Licht, Georg & Pellens, Maikel & Schubert, Torben, 2018. "Do Companies Benefit from Public Research Organizations? The Impact of the Fraunhofer Society in Germany," Papers in Innovation Studies 2018/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    20. Hyoung Sun Yoo & Chul Lee & Seung-Pyo Jun, 2018. "The Characteristics of SMEs Preferring Cooperative Research and Development Support from the Government: The Case of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, August.

    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:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4563-:d:1657426. 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.