IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v47y2020i2p194-206..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institution-driven innovation in Guangdong firms: Moderating effects of in-house formal R&D and industrial environment turbulence

Author

Listed:
  • Yongli Tang
  • Xinyue Hu
  • Claudio Petti
  • Matthias Thürer

Abstract

This article explores the moderating effects of in-house formal R&D and industrial environment turbulence on the relationship between institutional drivers, in terms of incentives and pressures, and firm innovation. Hypotheses were tested on a sample of manufacturing firms in Guangdong Province of China, where institutional changes and governmental policies play prominent roles in shaping innovation. Results show a positive main effect of institutional incentives, but an insignificant main effect of institutional pressures. In-house formal R&D and industrial turbulence negatively moderate the institutional incentives–innovations relationship, yet positively moderate the institutional pressures–innovations relationship. This study links the innovation systems literature with the institution-based view and deepens the understanding of the joint forces of institutional transitions, industrial changes, and resource heterogeneity in shaping innovation. The findings also inform managers and policymakers in institutional transition environments to better manage institutional drivers of innovation by considering firm- and industry-specific characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongli Tang & Xinyue Hu & Claudio Petti & Matthias Thürer, 2020. "Institution-driven innovation in Guangdong firms: Moderating effects of in-house formal R&D and industrial environment turbulence," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 194-206.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:47:y:2020:i:2:p:194-206.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scz058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:scippl:v:47:y:2020:i:2:p:194-206.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.