IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i16p7522-d1728607.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Channel Graph Convolutional Network for Evaluating Innovation Capability Toward Sustainable Seed Enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Shanshan Tang

    (College of Information and Electrical Engineering, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China)

  • Kaiyi Wang

    (College of Information and Electrical Engineering, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China
    Information Technology Research Center, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China
    National Innovation Center for Digital Seed Industry, Beijing 100097, China)

  • Feng Yang

    (Information Technology Research Center, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China
    National Innovation Center for Digital Seed Industry, Beijing 100097, China)

  • Shouhui Pan

    (Information Technology Research Center, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China
    National Innovation Center for Digital Seed Industry, Beijing 100097, China)

Abstract

The innovation capability of seed enterprises reflects their core competitiveness and serves as a vital foundation for sustainable agricultural development and modernization. Therefore, evaluating this capability is of great importance. However, existing evaluation methods primarily focus on internal enterprise attributes, overlooking the complex inter-enterprise relationships and lacking sufficient feature fusion capabilities to capture latent information. To address these limitations, this paper proposes a Multi-Channel Graph Convolutional Network (MGCN) model that integrates enterprise attributes with three types of relational graphs. The model adopts a multi-channel architecture for feature extraction and employs a gated attention mechanism for cross-graph feature fusion, jointly considering node features and relation information to improve prediction accuracy. Experimental results demonstrate that MGCN achieves an average accuracy of 83.59% under five-fold cross-validation, outperforming several mainstream models such as Random Forest and traditional GCN. Case studies further reveal that MGCN not only captures key features of individual enterprises but also leverages features and label distribution from neighboring enterprises, facilitating more context-aware classification decisions. In conclusion, the MGCN model provides an effective method for the intelligent evaluation of innovation capability in seed enterprises and supports the formulation of sustainable strategic plans at both the national and enterprise level.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanshan Tang & Kaiyi Wang & Feng Yang & Shouhui Pan, 2025. "Multi-Channel Graph Convolutional Network for Evaluating Innovation Capability Toward Sustainable Seed Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-26, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:16:p:7522-:d:1728607
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7522/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7522/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chiara Mio & Antonio Costantini & Silvia Panfilo, 2022. "Performance measurement tools for sustainable business: A systematic literature review on the sustainability balanced scorecard use," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 367-384, March.
    2. Toby E. Stuart, 2000. "Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high‐technology industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 791-811, August.
    3. Ao Yu & Zhuoqiang Jia & Weike Zhang & Ke Deng & Francisco Herrera, 2020. "A Dynamic Credit Index System for TSMEs in China Using the Delphi and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Lanlan Li & Lu Zhang & Xiudong Wang, 2024. "Research on the Dynamic Evaluation of the Competitiveness of Listed Seed Enterprises in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-24, July.
    5. Jin Peng & Wen-Tsao Pan, 2022. "Performance Appraisal System and Its Optimization Method for Enterprise Management Employees Based on the KPI Index," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2022, pages 1-12, June.
    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. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    2. Jarle Aarstad & Olav Andreas Kvitastein & Stig-Erik Jakobsen, 2019. "What Drives Enterprise Product Innovation? Assessing How Regional, National, And International Inter-Firm Collaboration Complement Or Substitute For R&D Investments," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(05), pages 1-25, June.
    3. Annika Rickne, 2006. "Connectivity and Performance of Science-based Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 393-407, May.
    4. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Bo Cowgill, 2017. "Multiplicative-innovation synergies: tests in technological acquisitions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1212-1233, October.
    5. Tom Broekel & Matthias Brachert, 2015. "The structure and evolution of inter-sectoral technological complementarity in R&D in Germany from 1990 to 2011," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 755-785, September.
    6. Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Li, Ying & Van de Vrande, Vareska, 2009. "The dual role of external corporate venturing in technological exploration," MPRA Paper 26488, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    7. Kang, Min-Ping & Mahoney, Joseph T. & Tan, Danchi, 2007. "Why Firms Make Unilateral Investments Specific to Other Firms: The Case of OEM Suppliers," Working Papers 07-0110, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    8. Guan, Jialin & Kirikkaleli, Dervis & Bibi, Ayesha & Zhang, Weike, 2020. "Natural resources rents nexus with financial development in the presence of globalization: Is the “resource curse” exist or myth?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    9. Tammy L. Madsen & Michael J. Leiblein, 2015. "What Factors Affect the Persistence of an Innovation Advantage?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(8), pages 1097-1127, December.
    10. Agata Sudolska & Justyna Łapińska, 2020. "Exploring Determinants of Innovation Capability in Manufacturing Companies Operating in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    11. Grant Savage & Michele Bunn & Barbara Gray & Qian Xiao & Sijun Wang & Elizabeth Wilson & Eric Williams, 2010. "Stakeholder Collaboration: Implications for Stakeholder Theory and Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 21-26, August.
    12. Yenn-Ru Chen & Carl R. Chen & Chih-Kang Chu, 2014. "The Effect of Executive Stock Options on Corporate Innovative Activities," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 43(2), pages 271-290, June.
    13. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    14. Thorgren, Sara & Wincent, Joakim & Eriksson, Jessica, 2011. "Too small or too large to trust your partners in multipartner alliances? The role of effort in initiating generalized exchanges," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 99-112, March.
    15. Manuel Guisado-González & Jennifer González-Blanco & José Luis Coca-Pérez, 2019. "Exploration, exploitation, and firm age in alliance portfolios," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 387-406, December.
    16. Mohamad Alghamdi, 2023. "Forming Stable R&D Networks in Different Market Structures," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 24(1), pages 91-117, May.
    17. Seungil Yum, 2019. "The interaction between knowledge-intensive business services and urban economy," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 63(1), pages 53-83, August.
    18. Wilfried Zidorn & Marcus Wagner, 2012. "Too Much of a Good Thing: The Role of Alliance Portfolio Diversity for Innovation Output in the Biotechnology Industry," DRUID Working Papers 12-10, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    19. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    20. Steffen Runge & Christian Schwens & Matthias Schulz, 2022. "The invention performance implications of coopetition: How technological, geographical, and product market overlaps shape learning and competitive tension in R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 266-294, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:16:p:7522-:d:1728607. 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.