政府研发资助对高校创新溢出的调节效应分析

    “官产学研”融合是新时代创新型国家建设的重要举措，有效释放政府研发资助的调节红利至关重要。本文借助理论模型阐释高校创新活动与地方创新发展之间的逻辑关系，揭示政府研发资助对高校创新溢出的调节影响可能存在较为复杂的动态机制。采用Hansen的门槛回归方法以及中国30个省份的面板数据实证研究发现，高校创新能力提升对区域创新发展具有积极影响，但在不同水平时影响弹性系数有所差异，高校创新能力处于（0.275 3 0.560 3\]区间的溢出效应最佳。政府研发资助对高校创新溢出具有动态调节作用，当资助强度高于0.085 3门槛阈值，高校创新才会释放正向溢出的“挤入效应”，并且随着研发资助强化，溢出轨迹呈现出边际递增规律。相应研究启示在于，定位高校创新溢出的最佳区间，跨越政府研发资助的约束门槛，才能有效撬动“官产学研”的内生驱动，加速区域创新转型。

An analysis of the regulation effect of government R&D funding on university innovation spillover

    In order to test the spillover effect of university innovation and the effectiveness of government R&D funding, the paper analyzed the spillover mechanism of university innovation performance with the theoretical perspective by constructing the correlation model between university innovation and regional innovation development. It also introduced government R&D funding as exogenous intervention variable, and proposed that government R&D funding might have complex dynamic influence on university innovation spillover. Based on panel data of 30 provinces from 2006 to 2017 in China, this paper empirically studied the spillover effect of university innovation on regional innovation development, and also test the moderating effect of government R&D funding with fixed effect model and threshold estimation model. The main conclusions and enlightenment are as follows:    Firstly, from the linear judgment, university innovation activities have significant positive spillover effect on regional innovation development, which is accord with empirical expectations. However, from the perspective of nonlinear spillover trial, the spillover effect of university innovation is not invariable, with optimal spillover space of (0.2753 0.5603]. The corresponding enlightenment is that, it is necessary to implement different strategies to strengthen university innovation, and the provinces that have already crossed the optimal spillover threshold should pay attention to the innovation transformation of "industry-university-research cooperation"; while most provinces in the optimal spillover range should pay attention to the basic role of university innovation in "industry-university-research cooperation", make effort in basic research and development of university, which provide strong driving force for the development of independent innovation.    Secondly, it is found that government R&D funding could accelerate the development of regional innovation. Although trade frictions lead to the criticism on China′s government R&D funding by the United States, criticizing that external intervention has damaged technological competition and market equity, but empirical studies have confirmed that China, as a developing country, is in weak position of technological competition, R&D funding could effectively dilute the risk of innovation input, optimize the innovation output performance and break through the bottleneck of "goose model". What is worth learning is that, western developed countries are also strengthening the incentive effect of government R&D funding, especially in some emerging science and technology fields. Through government R&D funding, universities, scientific research institutes and innovative enterprises, it could promote diversified innovation integration and technology transformation, and realize national innovation competitive advantages.    Finally, government R&D funding has more complex nonlinear regulatory effect on university innovation spillover. Low intensity funding could not release the spillover effect of university innovation effectively. Only when the funding intensity is higher than the threshold of 0.0853, it could leverage the innovation spillover of universities. While the R&D funding intensity is strengthening, this positive spillover has marginal increasing effect. It can be seen that the "crowding in effect" and "crowding out effect" of government R&D funding are not contradictory. The more reasonable explanation is that R&D funding has certain spatiotemporal differentiation characteristics in different influence interfaces, "crowding in effect" has threshold constraints, and the innovation spillover dividend of "industry-university-research cooperation" needs effective leverage of high-intensity funding. Therefore, active fiscal and tax policies should change "all-round" funding strategy in the past, reduce subsidies for traditional industries, increase the intensity of funding for universities, scientific research institutes and scientific and technological innovation industries, shorten the ripple cycle of supply side reform, and accelerate the endogenous drive and innovation development transformation.