|
|
|
| Policy Value Signals, Local Transformation Effects, and Urban Innovation: Evidence from Science and Technology Insurance |
| ZHUO Zhi, XIONG Bo, ZHU Heng
|
| School of Finance /Institute of Chinese Financial Studies/Center of Chinese Insurance Studies, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics |
|
|
|
Abstract Innovation activities are characterized by high uncertainty, long development cycles, and strong specialization, which create substantial challenges for risk allocation and make it difficult for market mechanisms alone to effectively diversify and share innovation-related risks. As the primary spatial carriers of innovation resources and activities, cities play a crucial role in determining the quality and sustainability of regional economic development. Consequently, how to optimize urban innovation ecosystems and stimulate the vitality of innovation actors through institutionalized risk-governance instruments has become a critical issue in both theoretical and practical domains. As an institutional arrangement designed to support technological innovation, the Science and Technology Insurance (STI) Policy aims to reduce uncertainties associated with research and development, technology commercialization, and industrial application by providing insurance protection. The value signals embedded in such policies reflect local governments’ emphasis on innovation risk protection and their intentions regarding resource allocation. However, existing studies have rarely examined, from the perspective of central–local policy coordination, the specific mechanisms through which science and technology insurance signals influence urban innovation via local transformation effects.
Taking STI policy signals as the research object and urban innovation performance as the analytical focus, this study systematically investigates how central policy signals drive urban innovation through local transformation effects. To address this question, a two-stage analytical framework of “macro-level value signals–local transformation effects–urban innovation-driven development” is constructed. The first stage examines the transmission of central policy signals to local policy signals, whereby macro-level value signals are transformed into local transformation effects. This process is verified through a comparison of the temporal distribution patterns of central and municipal policy signals. The second stage explores the impact of local policy signals on urban innovation by empirically assessing their mechanisms and effects using city-level panel data. The first stage provides the institutional cognition and signal-transmission foundation for the latter, while the second quantitatively evaluates the actual innovation outcomes. Together, these two stages form a coherent and progressive chain of empirical evidence.
Using panel data from 284 prefecture-level cities in China from 2007 to 2022, this study employs the BERTopic model to conduct topic clustering and evolutionary analysis of 159 documents on science and technology insurance issued by the central government. The TF-IDF method is further used to measure the textual similarity between local and central policies and construct an indicator of urban policy signal intensity. Subsequently, two-way fixed-effects models, mediation-effect models, and spatial Durbin models are applied to empirically examine the impact of policy signals on urban innovation. The results reveal five major findings. First, the central science and technology insurance system exhibits clear evolutionary phases and structural characteristics. Its policy orientation has gradually evolved from a routine branch of property insurance into a key instrument serving the national innovation strategy. Through policy-text responses, local governments generate local transformation effects, which constitute a crucial link in central–local policy coordination. Second, urban policy signals significantly promote urban innovation, and this result remains robust after a series of robustness tests, confirming the ex ante guiding value of policy signals. Third, mechanism analyses show that policy signals stimulate innovation through three channels: promoting the development of the science and technology insurance market, increasing local government expenditure on science and technology, and encouraging regional R&D investment. Fourth, the policy effects exhibit significant structural heterogeneity. The innovation promoting effects are stronger in central regions and northern cities, more pronounced in cities with medium levels of innovation, whereas the effect is not significant in fifth-tier cities. Fifth, policy signals display spatial autocorrelation but do not generate significant spatial spillover effects.
This study contributes to the literature in three respects. First, it broadens the scope of existing research by moving beyond the traditional paradigm that treats policies as homogeneous interventions and instead conceptualizes science and technology insurance as a dynamic signal-transmission system encompassing macro-level intentions, local transformation, and stakeholder responses. Second, it enriches both theoretical understanding and policy implications by empirically identifying the multiple pathways through which policy signals drive urban innovation and by identifying the spatial boundaries of their effects, thereby providing valuable references for optimizing policy design and enhancing its effectiveness in supporting regional innovation systems. Third, through the analysis of STI policy texts and the construction of indicators, this study performs clustering and dynamic thematic analysis on central STI policies, quantifies policy-text similarity, and constructs a continuous policy signal intensity indicator. This achieves a complete application of policy text mining from macro-structural analysis to quantitative measurement, offering a novel measurement approach for future research.
|
|
Received: 20 January 2026
Published: 17 September 2026
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
陈旭、邱斌和纪展鹏,2025,《城市网络嵌入、信息可得性与企业创新边界》,《经济研究》第6期,第57~76页。
|
| [2] |
杜运周、孙宁和刘秋辰,2024,《运用混合方法发展和分析复杂中介模型——以营商环境促进创新活力,协同新质生产力和“就业优先”为例》,《管理世界》第6期,第217~237页。
|
| [3] |
范红丽、卓志和麻睿欣,2025,《保险赋能、激励机制与企业数字技术创新——来自董责险的证据》,《金融研究》第12期,第114~132页。
|
| [4] |
胡宏兵、赵春旭和万晨声,2025,《数字经济、人力资本效应与城市创新产出》,《财贸经济》第1期,第133~150页。
|
| [5] |
雷卓骏和刘晔,2024,《制度创新何以赋能区域创新:来自市场准入负面清单模式的证据》,《中国软科学》第9期,第113~123页。
|
| [6] |
李珒,2022,《政策信号、经济位次与市级政府环境监管行为选择》,《中国软科学》第11期,第102~108页。
|
| [7] |
李珒,2024,《政策信号的多层级传递与市级政府行为合规:基于环境信息公开案例的实证研究》,《中国软科学》第5期,第188~196页。
|
| [8] |
刘冬姣和朱涛,2025,《首台(套)重大技术装备保险与企业创新投入》,《科学学研究》第1期,第359~372页。
|
| [9] |
聂长飞和简新华,2020,《中国高质量发展的测度及省际现状的分析比较》,《数量经济技术经济研究》第2期,第26~47页。
|
| [10] |
邱洋冬,2022,《专利保险能否激励企业创新？——基于广延边际与集约边际的视角》,《产业经济研究》第2期,第114~127页。
|
| [11] |
孙浦阳、栾泽华和于春海,2025,《知识产权维权保护、创新风险和企业研发外包——基于“专利保险试点”政策的微观检验》,《管理世界》第2期,第142~163页。
|
| [12] |
王峤、李松林和刘修岩等,2025,《“新”城市如何催生新知识:城市更新的创新增长效应》,《经济研究》第7期,第62~81页。
|
| [13] |
王竹泉、于小悦和马新啸,2023,《中国式现代化、公共资源市场化配置与创新驱动发展——来自城市公共资源交易中心设立的经验证据》,《管理世界》第2期,第100~121页。
|
| [14] |
徐浩萍、陈欣和陈超,2009,《国有企业IPO发行折价:基于政策信号理论的解释》,《金融研究》第10期,第133~149页。
|
| [15] |
易兰丽和范梓腾,2022,《层级治理体系下的政策注意力识别偏好与政策采纳——以省级“互联网+政务服务”平台建设为例》,《公共管理学报》第1期,第40~51+167页。
|
| [16] |
张同斌和王蕾,2024,《政策信号与流动人口长期居留意愿》,《世界经济》第7期,第97~122页。
|
| [17] |
周冬华和彭剑飞,2023,《首台套重大技术装备保险与企业创新》,《科研管理》第9期,第80~90页。
|
| [18] |
Białkowski, J., H. D. Dang and X. Wei, 2022, “High Policy Uncertainty and Low Implied Market Volatility: An Academic Puzzle?”, Journal of Financial Economics, 143(3) , pp.1185~1208.
|
| [19] |
Bianchi, M. and M. Bobba, 2013, “Liquidity, Risk, and Occupational Choices”, Review of Economic Studies, 80(2), pp.491~511.
|
| [20] |
García-Peñalosa, C.and J. F. Wen, 2008, “Redistribution and Entrepreneurship with Schumpeterian Growth”, Journal of Economic Growth, 13(1) , pp.57~80.
|
| [21] |
Greer, R. A., T. T. Moldogaziev, R. P. Scott, et al., 2023,“Signaling Resilience: A Computational Assessment of Narratives in Local Government Budgets”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(4) , pp.688~700.
|
| [22] |
Hepfer, B. F., H. W. Judd and S. C. Rice, 2025, “Signaling Innovation: The Nontax Benefits of Claiming R&D Tax Credits”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 79(1) , 101718.
|
| [23] |
Jones, B. D.and F. R. Baumgartner, 2005, The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems, Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
|
| [24] |
Newman, A. F., 2007, “Risk-Bearing and Entrepreneurship”, Journal of Economic Theory, 137(1) , pp.11~26.
|
| [25] |
Spence, M., 1973, “Job Market Signaling”,The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), pp.355~374.
|
|
|
|
