IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0324587.html

The complex impact of China’s science and technology talent policies on key core technologies R&D

Author

Listed:
  • Pu Miao
  • Xiaoyan Zhang
  • Ning Zhang

Abstract

Key core technologies have become the focal point of global technological competition. For latecomer countries, formulating effective science and technology talent policies to stimulate researchers’ motivation and innovation potential is crucial for mastering these key technologies. This study uses a sample of 1363 publicly listed enterprises in China from 2011 to 2023 to investigate the impact of science and technology talent policies on key core technologies R&D in enterprises. The findings are as follows: (1) Science and technology talent policies significantly promote key core technologies R&D; however, their impact is stronger on non-key core technologies R&D and utility model R&D than on key core technologies R&D. Further study found that non-key core technologies R&D and utility model R&D have a crowding-out effect on key core technologies R&D to a certain extent, and the effect of the former is stronger than that of the latter. (2) As the intensity of policy support increases, its impact on key core technologies R&D also strengthens. Moreover, policies related to talent subsidies, innovation incentives, talent introduction, and high-level talent innovation support all facilitate key core technologies R&D, although the effects vary across these policy types. Moreover, there is no interaction between talent subsidies and innovation incentives, or between talent subsidies and high-level talent innovation support, but there is an offsetting effect between the other policies. (3) The positive impact of science and technology talent policies exhibits a time lag, generally ranging from 4 to 5 years. During this lag period, the effect on the number of patent declines by 8.475% to 28.283%, while the impact on the number of citations of patents decreases by 55.696% to 73.214%. (4) The significant promotional effect of science and technology talent policies is most pronounced in non-state-owned enterprises and those with high R&D investment, but such policies do not have a notable impact on state-owned enterprises or those with low R&D investment. The study demonstrates that latecomer countries can effectively promote key core technologies R&D by designing science and technology talent policies. Based on these findings, recommendations are made to enhance the support intensity of talent policies, optimize the synergistic effects of these policies, extend the duration of policy support, and implement differentiated measures for policy execution.

Suggested Citation

  • Pu Miao & Xiaoyan Zhang & Ning Zhang, 2025. "The complex impact of China’s science and technology talent policies on key core technologies R&D," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-37, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0324587
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324587
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0324587
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0324587&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0324587?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    2. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Lerner, Josh, 2010. "The Financing of R&D and Innovation," 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 609-639, Elsevier.
    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. Hickfang, Michael & Holder, Ulrike, 2018. "The impact of stock options on risk-taking: Founder-CEOs and innovation," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 12/2018, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    2. Hirokazu Mizobata & Hiroshi Teruyama, 2020. "Factor Adjustments and Liquidity Management: Evidence from Japan's Two Lost Decades and Financial Crises," KIER Working Papers 1043, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    3. Herz, Holger & Schunk, Daniel & Zehnder, Christian, 2014. "How do judgmental overconfidence and overoptimism shape innovative activity?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-23.
    4. Yang Li & Yuanzhu Wang & Rajah Rasiah, 2023. "Research on the Influence of Tax Incentives and Financing Constraints on NEEQ Enterprises’ Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, February.
    5. de Haas, Ralph & Popov, A., 2018. "Financial Development and Industrial Pollution," Other publications TiSEM a0a4fb82-734a-442a-9ea1-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Çağatay Bircan & Ralph De Haas, 2020. "The Limits of Lending? Banks and Technology Adoption across Russia," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 536-609.
    7. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2022. "Top R&D investors, structural change and the R&D growth performance of young and old firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(1), pages 1-33, March.
    8. Didier, Tatiana & Levine, Ross & Llovet Montanes, Ruth & Schmukler, Sergio L., 2021. "Capital market financing and firm growth," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Jean Acheson & Rory Malone, 2020. "Respect Your Elders: Evidence from Ireland’s R&D Tax Credit Reform," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 51(1), pages 105-131.
    10. Kadri Männasoo & Heili Hein, 2017. "Are R&D companies credit-constrained? Credit frictions during and post-crisis," TUT Economic Research Series 29, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    11. Chiara Pederzoli & Grid Thoma & Costanza Torricelli, 2013. "Modelling Credit Risk for Innovative SMEs: the Role of Innovation Measures," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 44(1), pages 111-129, August.
    12. Mellace, Giovanni & Ventura, Marco, 2019. "Intended and unintended effects of public incentives for innovation. Quasi-experimental evidence from Italy," Discussion Papers on Economics 9/2019, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    13. John Van Reenen, 2022. "Innovation and Human Capital Policy," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 61-83, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Gabriele Angori & David Aristei, 2020. "Heterogeneity and state dependence in firms’ access to credit: Microevidence from the euro area," SEEDS Working Papers 0220, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Feb 2020.
    15. Boeing, Philipp & Eberle, Jonathan & Howell, Anthony, 2022. "The impact of China's R&D subsidies on R&D investment, technological upgrading and economic growth," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    16. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen & Heidi Williams, 2019. "A Toolkit of Policies to Promote Innovation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 163-184, Summer.
    17. Sarah Armitage & Noël Bakhtian & Adam Jaffe, 2024. "Innovation Market Failures and the Design of New Climate Policy Instruments," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 4-48.
    18. Yan, Xueling & Yu, Shule & Zheng, Xing, 2025. "Is government subsidy efficient? Evidence from SMEs' automation in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(PB).
    19. Ceccagnoli, Marco & Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P., 2024. "Reaching beyond low-hanging fruit: Basic research and innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    20. Вавилов С.А. & Светлов К.В., 2015. "Оценка Стоимости Кредитования Венчурных Проектов На Основе Метода Реплицирующего Портфеля," Журнал Экономика и математические методы (ЭММ), Центральный Экономико-Математический Институт (ЦЭМИ), vol. 51(4), pages 76-84, октябрь.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0324587. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.