Effects of Indigenous Innovation Policy on the S & T Outputs in China Evidence from the Higher Education System
Hua Meng
DOI: 10.4236/ti.2011.23017   PDF    HTML     5,904 Downloads   9,806 Views   Citations


This paper evaluated the effects of indigenous innovation policies changes in 1996 and 2002 on the S&T outputs in the Chinese higher education system. I used interrupted time series design with yearly measures of number of SCI articles, average citation per item in 5 years, number of invention patent application accepted and invention patent granted from 1980 to 2008. The results showed statistically significant increases in the four output measures after the 1996 and 2002 innovation policies were adopted by the Chinese universities. In terms of effect size, the increases were 133% and 82% in number of SCI articles and 41% and 37% in citation impact for the two policy changes. The effect sizes are more noteworthy with 177% and 202% increases in patent applied 146% and 256% increase in patent granted for the two policy changes. The results supported all hypotheses and are basically consisted with prior research done by other scholars. However, small size sample and no control group are the two limitations of this research and future research could consider about the possibility to combine time series data and cross-sector data.

Share and Cite:

Meng, H. (2011) Effects of Indigenous Innovation Policy on the S & T Outputs in China Evidence from the Higher Education System. Technology and Investment, 2, 163-170. doi: 10.4236/ti.2011.23017.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] R. K. Woolthuisa, M. Lankhuizenb and V. Gilsing, “A System Failure Framework for Innovation Policy Design,” Technovation, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2005, pp. 609-619.
[2] T. D. Tsoutsos and Y. A. Stamboulis, “The Sustainable Diffusion of Renewable Energy Technologies as an Example of an Innovation-Focused Policy,” Technovation, Vol. 25, No. 5, 2005, pp. 753-761.
[3] A. Rosiello and L. Orsenig, “A Critical Assessment of Regional Innovation Policy in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology,” European Planning Studies, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2008, pp. 337-357. doi:10.1080/09654310801920599
[4] Henk J. Van Zuylen and K. Matthias Weber, “Strategies for European Innovation Policy in the Transport Field,” Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Vol. 69, No. 9, 2002, pp. 929-951. doi:10.1016/S0040-1625(02)00191-9
[5] H. Godoe and S. Nygaard, “System Failure, Innovation Policy and Patents: Fuel Cells and Related Hydrogen Technology in Norway 1990-2002,” Energy Policy, Vol. 34, No. 13, 2006, pp. 1697-1708. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.12.016
[6] G. Avnimelech, “A Five-phase Entrepreneurial Oriented Innovation and Technology Policy Pro?le: The Israeli Experience,” European Planning Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2008, pp. 81-98. doi:10.1080/09654310701747985
[7] C. Tamásy, “Rethinking Technology-Oriented Business Incubators: Developing a Robust Policy Instrument for Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Regional Development?” Growth and Change, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2007, pp. 460-473. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2257.2007.00379.x
[8] Q. W. Lu, “China’s Leap into the Information Age: Innovation and Organization in the Computer Industry,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.
[9] W. Lazonick, “Indigenous Innovation and Economic Development: Lessons from China’s Leap into the Information Age,” Industry and Innovation, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2004, pp. 273-297. doi:10.1080/1366271042000289360
[10] E. Mansfield, “Contribution of R & D to Economic Growth in the United States,” Science, Vol. 175, No. 4021, 1972, pp. 477-486. doi:10.1126/science.175.4021.477
[11] Z. Griliches, “The Search for R & D Spillovers,” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol. 94, Supplement, 1992, pp. S29-S47. doi:10.2307/3440244
[12] J. Mairesse and P. Mohnen, “Accounting for Innovation and Measuring Innovativeness: An Illustrative Framework and an Application,” American Economic Review, Vol. 92, No. 2, 2002, pp. 226-230. doi:10.1257/000282802320189302
[13] X. L. Huang, B. Schroder and P. Steffens, “The Chinese Steel Industry in Transition: Industry Perspective on Innovation Policy,” R & D Management, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1999, pp. 17-25. doi:10.1111/1467-9310.00113
[14] E. Barbieri, M. R. Di Tommaso and M. L. Huang, "Industrial Development Policy and Innovation in Southern China: Government Targets and Firms’ Behavior,” European Planning Studies, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2010, pp. 83-105. doi:10.1080/09654310903343542
[15] J. L. Woolley and R. M. Rottener, “Innovation Policy and Nanotechnology Entrepreneurship,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 32, No. 5, 2008, pp. 791-811. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00256.x
[16] A. Uzun, “Science and Technology Policy in Turkey: National Strategies for Innovation and Change during the 1983-2003 Period and Beyond,” Scientometrics, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2006, pp. 551-559. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0040-1
[17] Q. Z. Yan and W. Y. Miao, “A Study on the Correlation between Scientific Input and Output in Henan Province,” Henan Social Sciences, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2006, pp. 147-150.
[18] T. L. Lan, Z. J. Yang, Z. H. Luo, “Gray Correlation Analysis on the Scientific Input and Output in Guangzi,” Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2008, pp. 21-23.
[19] X. L. Geng, “Effects of Scientific Inputs on Scientific Outputs from 1995 to 2007 in China,” Science and Technology Management Research, Vol. 29, No. 5, 2009, pp. 171-172.
[20] F. Y. Dong, “Correlation between Scientific Input and Output and Prediction of It,” Technology Economics, Vol. 128, No. 17, 2009. pp. 22-26.
[21] Y. Q. Li, B. Y. Qian, S. T. Tian and H. Zhao, “Study on the Determinants of Scientific Outputs in Universities,” Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2005, pp. 50-54.
[22] S. Bhattacharya and M. Meyer, “Large Firms and the Science-Technology Interface: Patents, Patent Citations, and Scientific Output of Multinational Corporations in Thin Films,” Scientometrics, Vol. 58, No. 2, 2003, pp. 265-279. doi:10.1023/A:1026284510104
[23] R. J. W. Tijssen, “Is the Commercialisation of Scientific Research Affecting the Production of Public Knowledge? Global Trends in the Output of Corporate Research Articles,” Research Policy, Vol. 33, No. 5, 2004, pp. 709-733. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2003.11.002
[24] H. Horta and F. M. Veloso, “Opening the Box: Comparing EU and US Scientific output by Scientific Field,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 74, No. 8, 2007, pp. 1334-1356. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2007.02.013
[25] B. Goldfarb, “The Effect of Government Contracting on Academic Research: Does the Source of Funding Affect Scientific Output?” Research Policy, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2008, pp. 41-58. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.07.011
[26] D. Czarnitzki, K. Kraft and S. Thorwarth, “The Knowledge Production of ‘R’ and ‘D’,” Economics Letters, Vol. 105, No. 1, 2009, pp. 141-143. doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2009.06.020
[27] A. Borrego, M. Barrios, A. Villarroya and C. Olle, "Scientific Output and Impact of Postdoctoral Scientists: A Gender Perspective,” Scientometrics, Vol. 83, No. 1, 2010, pp. 93-101. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0025-y
[28] Z. Griliches, “Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 28, No. 4, 1990, pp. 1661-1707.
[29] H. F. Liu, Q. Q. yang, “Evaluation of China’s Scientific Outputs Based on Articles and Patents,” Scientific Management Research, Vol. 26, No. 8, 2008, pp. 48-50.
[30] N. Y. Huang and Y. S. Wu, “Comparative Study on the Scientific Output Indicators between Taiwan and Mainland China,” Studies in Science of Science, Vol. 20, No. 6, 2002, pp. 604-610.
[31] J. W. Yao, “Status Quo and Countermeasures of China’s R & D Outputs,” Scientific Management Research, Vol. 20, No. 6, 2002, pp. 21-25.
[32] T. Qin, “Study on the R & D Expenditures and Scientific Outputs in Developing Economies,” Chinese Scientific & Technological Forum, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2004, pp. 131-135.
[33] Z. G. Fu, “Why Nanjing University Consecutively Beat Other Universities in Terms of SCI Articles for Seven Years?” People’s Daily Overseas Edition, 2000, p. A9.
[34] C. L. Britt, G. Kleck and D. J. Bordua, “A Reassessment of the D. C. Gun Law: Some Cautionary Notes on the Use of Interrupted Time Series Designs for Policy Impact Assessment,” Law & Society Review, Vol. 30, No. 6, 1996, pp. 361-380.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.