Summary:
With the development of the international division of labor from “intra-industry trade” to “intra-product trade,” it has become difficult for enterprises to keep abreastof all areas. Collaborative innovation networks can promote complementary advantages and resource coordination between enterprises and research institutions, thereby enhancing enterprises' export performance. Moreover, cooperative R&D among enterprises, universities, and research institutions is the micro basis of the implementation of a national collaborative innovation strategy. The formation of an informal cooperation network among innovation subjects can promote the integrated development of science and technology, and ensure that it is adapted to increase productivity. In this paper, we analyze the impact of collaborative innovation on the exports of enterprises by using the theory of enterprise heterogeneity. Based on joint patent data, we construct the collaborative innovation network of China from 1999 to 2007, and analyze its topological characteristics. We also empirically test the impact of the role and position of enterprises in the collaborative innovation network on their export performance, and use instrumental variables to avoid possible endogeneity problems. The analysis of network structure shows that Chinese universities and research institutions play the important roles of “bridge” and “hub” in the collaborative innovation network.Collaborative innovation occurs most frequently among enterprises, followed by collaborative innovation between research institutions and enterprises;collaborative innovation among research institutions occurs least often. The proportion of collaborative innovation between research institutions and enterprises is gradually increasing. Through empirical analysis, we find that enterprises that engage in collaborative innovation have better export performance than those who do not. Independent R&D and collaborative innovation both improve the export performance of enterprises, and enterprises in the core position of the collaborative innovation network have a larger market share. After controlling for years and enterprises,we find that the export volume of enterprises increased by 0.9996% due to collaborative innovation.Further analysis shows that the “research institution-enterprise” model of collaborative innovation has no significant effect on the export performance of enterprises, while the “enterprise-enterprise” model significantly promotes enterprises' export performance. Collaborative innovation has a significantly positive effect on the markup of enterprises, and has a stronger effect on the promotion of export enterprises. Four types of collaborative innovation significantly promote the exports of enterprises, but the impact of collaborative innovation on design type is relatively small.Lastly, a mechanism test shows that collaborative innovation mainly promotes exports by improving enterprises' production technology. Although it increases the input cost of enterprises to a certain extent, it has little impact on their exports, and collaborative innovation plays a leading role in promoting enterprises' technological advances. This paper attempts to identify a feasible path for implementing China's innovation strategy and promoting enterprises' export performance from the collaborative innovation network perspective. The government should encourage core enterprises and research institutions in the collaborative innovation network to play the roles of technology leader and backbone, and establish “bridges” and “ties” among the main entities in the network. It is necessary to encourage export enterprises to shift from performance competition to efficiency competition, encourage innovation among research institutions and enterprises, and improve the efficiency with which scientific advances are converted into productivity. Overall, this paper enriches the literature in three ways. First, it identifies an extensive collaborative innovation network based on a large sample of 3,114,809 joint patent applications covering all industries in China. Second, it explains the internal mechanism of the formation of a wide range of collaborative innovation relationships among enterprises, based on the theory of enterprise heterogeneity, and discusses the impact of enterprises' position in the collaborative innovation network on their export performance.Lastly, it is one of the first studies to empirically examine the impact of collaborative innovation networks on the export performance of enterprises.
孙天阳, 成丽红. 协同创新网络与企业出口绩效——基于社会网络和企业异质性的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 477(3): 96-114.
SUN Tianyang, CHENG Lihong. Collaborative Innovation Networks and Enterprise Export Performance: A Study Based on Social Networks and Enterprise Heterogeneity. Journal of Financial Research, 2020, 477(3): 96-114.
Atkeson A. and A. T. Burstein, 2010, “Innovation, Firm Dynamics, and International Trade”, Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), pp.433～484.
[17]
Baron R. M. and D. A. Kenny, 1986, “The Moderator-mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), pp.1173～1182.
[18]
Brandt L., J. V. Biesebroeck and Y. Zhang, 2012, “Creative Accounting or Creative Destruction？ Firm-level Productivity Growth in Chinese Manufacturing”, Journal of Development Economics, 97(2), pp.339～351.
[19]
Chen N., J. Imbs and A. Scott, 2009, “The Dynamics of Trade and Competition”, Journal of International Economics, 77(1):, pp.50～62.
[20]
De Loecker J. and F. Warzynski, 2012, “Markups and Firm-level Export Status”, American Economic Review, 102(6), pp.2437～2471.
[21]
Dixit A. K. and J. E. Stiglitz, 1977, “Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity”, American Economic Review, 67(3), pp.297～308.
[22]
Eaton J. and S. Kortum, 2002, “Technology, Geography, and Trade”, Econometrica, 70(5), pp. 1741～1779.
[23]
Feenstra R. C., Z. Li and M. Yu, 2014, “Exports and Credit Constraints under Incomplete Information: Theory and Evidence from China”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 96(4), pp. 729～744.
[24]
Fernandes A. P. and H. Tang, 2014, “Learning to Export from Neighbors”, Journal of International Economics, 94(1), pp.67～84.
[25]
Freeman L. C., 1978, “Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification”, Social Networks, 1(3), pp.215-239.
[26]
Girma S., H. Görg and A. Hanley, 2008, “R&D and Exporting: A Comparison of British and Irish Enterprises”, Review of World Economics, 144(4), pp.750～773.
[27]
Goyal S. and S. Joshi, 2003, “Networks of Collaboration in Oligopoly”, Games and Economic behavior, 43(1), pp.57～85.
[28]
Goyal S., A. Konovalov and J. L. Moraga-González, 2008, “Hybrid R&D”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(6), pp.1309～1338.
[29]
Guariglia A., X. Liu and L. Song, 2011, “Internal Finance and Growth: Microeconometric Evidence on Chinese Firms”, Journal of Development Economics, 96(1), pp.79～94.
[30]
Kamal F. and A. Sundaram, 2016. “Buyer-seller Relationships in International Trade: Do Your Neighbors Matter？”, Journal of International Economics, 102, pp.128～140.
[31]
König M. D., S. Battiston, M. Napoletano and F. Schweitzer, 2012, “The Efficiency and Stability of R&D Networks”, Games & Economic Behavior, 75(2), pp.694～713.
[32]
Lissoni F., 2010. “Academic Inventors as Brokers”, Research Policy, 39(7), pp.843～857.
[33]
Yu M., 2010, “Trade, Democracy, and the Gravity Equation”, Journal of Development Economics, 91(2), pp.289～300.
