Intergovernmental Competition and Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Efficiency: Evidence from China

被引:0
|
作者
Yu, Daohan [1 ]
Wang, Fang [1 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Agr Univ, Coll Management, Chengdu 611130, Peoples R China
来源
AGRICULTURE-BASEL | 2025年 / 15卷 / 05期
关键词
intergovernmental competition; agricultural innovation efficiency; DEA-SBM model; regional heterogeneity; FISCAL DECENTRALIZATION; YARDSTICK COMPETITION; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; TAX COMPETITION; PERFORMANCE; GOVERNMENT; FEDERALISM; IMPACT;
D O I
10.3390/agriculture15050530
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Against the backdrop of global challenges to food security and China's push to modernize its agriculture, it is critical to understand how government strategies affect innovation efficiency. This study examines how three modes of intergovernmental competition-fiscal spending competition (strategically increasing public spending to attract resources), tax competition (providing incentives to promote investment), and promotion competition (officials prioritizing short-term projects for promotion)-affect the efficiency of agricultural science and technology innovations across China's provinces. Utilizing panel data (2000-2021) and a Slack-Based Measure Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA-SBM) model, we find that fiscal spending competition suppresses efficiency, particularly in western regions where infrastructure investments crowd out R&D. Tax competition enhances efficiency, yet its impact is attenuated in central China due to low industrial upgrading. Promotion competition impedes long-term innovation, as frequent official turnover prioritizes short-term projects. Regional heterogeneity highlights eastern China's market-driven advantages versus central/western regions' structural constraints. Policy implications advocate for spatially differentiated governance, including R&D tax rebates in the east and cross-regional innovation alliances. This study contributes to fiscal decentralization theory by revealing the nonlinear effects of competition modes on agricultural innovation.
引用
收藏
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Impact of urbanization on agricultural ecological efficiency: evidence from China
    Chen, Ximing
    Shang, Jie
    Ji, Xueqiang
    CIENCIA RURAL, 2023, 53 (03):
  • [42] The Nexus between Foreign Competition and Buying Innovation: Evidence from China's High-Technology Industry
    Yi, Su
    Rabnawaz, Muhammad
    Jalal, Waqar
    Zeb, Ali
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (15)
  • [43] How to guide venture capital to startups? Evidence from China's Science and Technology Innovation Board
    Bi, Ruigang
    Kou, Zonglai
    Zhou, Min
    JOURNAL OF ASIAN ECONOMICS, 2024, 95
  • [44] Digital finance and enterprise innovation efficiency: Evidence from China
    Wang, Hainan
    Liu, Fengshuo
    FINANCE RESEARCH LETTERS, 2024, 59
  • [45] Farm size and agricultural technology progress: Evidence from China
    Hu, Yi
    Li, Binbin
    Zhang, Zhenghe
    Wang, Jian
    JOURNAL OF RURAL STUDIES, 2022, 93 : 417 - 429
  • [46] ESG performance and corporate technology innovation: Evidence from China
    Yang, Xiangyang
    Li, Zijun
    Qiu, Zhaoxuan
    Wang, Jinmin
    Liu, Bei
    TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2024, 206
  • [47] Effects of Social Capital on Technology Innovation: Evidence from China
    Yang Yu
    Shen Kunrong
    RECENT ADVANCE IN STATISTICS APPLICATION AND RELATED AREAS, VOLS I AND II, 2009, : 972 - 983
  • [48] International technology spillovers and innovation quality: Evidence from China
    Feng, Wei
    Li, Jiajia
    ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AND POLICY, 2021, 72 : 289 - 308
  • [49] Evolutionary Path of Innovation Fund for Agricultural Science and Technology in China: Based on International Comparative Study
    Li, Min
    Shi, Tao
    ADVANCES IN EDUCATION AND MANAGEMENT, PT IV, 2011, 211 : 176 - +
  • [50] Impact of government science and technology policies with a focus on biotechnology research on commercial agricultural innovation in China
    Jin, Yanhong
    Hu, Yahong
    Pray, Carl
    Hu, Ruifa
    CHINA AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2017, 9 (03) : 438 - 452