The evolution of government sponsored collaboration network and its impact on innovation: A bibliometric analysis in the Chinese solar PV sector

Research Policy

Volumn 47, Issue 7, 2018, Pages 1295-1308

  Liang, Xinning ^a   Liu, Anita M M ^b  

^a China Merchants Group Postdoctoral   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Attribute proximity; Collaboration network; Innovation performance; Network structure; Solar photovoltaics

Indexed keywords

EFFICIENCY; PHOTOVOLTAIC EFFECTS; SOLAR CONCENTRATORS; SOLAR POWER GENERATION;

ATTRIBUTE PROXIMITY; COLLABORATION NETWORK; INNOVATION PERFORMANCE; NETWORK STRUCTURES; SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

EID: 85045324257     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.04.012     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Ahuja, G., Katila, R., Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study. Strateg. Manage. J. 22:3 (2001), 197–220.
2. Ahuja, G., Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study. Adm. Sci. Q. 45:3 (2000), 425–455.
3. Angelini, P.P., The Role of Inter-Organizational Proximity on the Evolution of the European Aerospace R&D Collaboration Network. Working Paper Cnr-Ceris No. 02/2014. 2014 (Retrieved from http://www.ceris.cnr.it/ceris/workingpaper/2014/WP_02_2014_ANGELINI.pdf).
4. Autio, E., Kanninen, S., Gustafsson, R., First-and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs. Res. Policy 37:1 (2008), 59–76.
5. Balland, P.A., De Vaan, M., Boschma, R., The dynamics of interfirm networks along the industry life cycle: the case of the global video game industry, 1987–2007. J. Econ. Geogr. 13:5 (2013), 741–765.
6. Balland, P.A., Proximity and the evolution of collaboration networks: evidence from research and development projects within the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) industry. Reg. Stud. 46:6 (2012), 741–756.
7. Baum, J.A., Calabrese, T., Silverman, B.S., Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strateg. Manage. J. 21:3 (2000), 267–294.
8. Belderbos, R., Faems, D., Leten, B., Looy, B.V., Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: exploitation and exploration within and between firms. J. Prod. Innov. Manage. 27:6 (2010), 869–882.
9. Bell, A., Jones, K., Explaining fixed effects: random effects modeling of time-series cross-sectional and panel data. Political Science Research and Methods 3:1 (2015), 133–153.
10. Benner, M.J., Tushman, M.L., Exploitation, exploration, and process management: the productivity dilemma revisited. Acad. Manage. Rev. 28:2 (2003), 238–256.
11. Bjerregaard, T., Industry and academia in convergence: micro-institutional dimensions of R&D collaboration. Technovation 30:2 (2010), 100–108.
12. Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., Freeman, L.C., Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. 2002, Analytic Technologies, Harvard, MA.
13. Borgatti, S.P., NetDraw Software for Network Visualization. 2002, Analytic Technologies, Lexington, KY.
14. Boschma, R., Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg. Stud. 39:1 (2005), 61–74.
15. Broekel, T., Boschma, R., Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: the proximity paradox. J. Econ. Geogr. 12:2 (2012), 409–433.
16. Burt, R., Structural Holes: the Social Structure of Competition. 1992, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
17. Burt, R.S., Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital. 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
18. Capaldo, A., Petruzzelli, A.M., Partner geographic and organizational proximity and the innovative performance of knowledge-creating alliances. Eur. Manage. Rev. 11:1 (2014), 63–84.
19. Carrincazeaux, C., Lung, Y., Vicente, J., The scientific trajectory of the French school of proximity: interaction-and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. Eur. Plann. Stud. 16:5 (2008), 617–628.
20. Cattani, G., Rotolo, D., An exploratory study of the role of publishing Inventors in nanotechnology. Aharonson, B., Stettner, U., Aharonson, B.S., Amburgey, T.L., Ellis, S., Drori, I., (eds.) Understanding the Relationship Between Networks and Technology, Creativity and Innovation, 2013, Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, 97–122.
21. Chiu, Y.C., Lai, H.C., Lee, T.Y., Liaw, Y.C., Technological diversification, complementary assets, and performance. Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change 75:6 (2008), 875–892.
22. Clark, T.S., Linzer, D.A., Should I use fixed or random effects?. Polit. Sci. Res. Methods 3:2 (2015), 399–408.
23. Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Mustar, P., Behavioural additionality of R&D subsidies: a learning perspective. Res. Policy 38:10 (2009), 1517–1533.
24. Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 35:1 (1990), 128–152.
25. Coleman, J.S., Foundations of Social Theory. 1990, Harvard university press, Cambridge.
26. Crosby, M., Patents, innovation and growth. Econ. Rec. 76:234 (2000), 255–262.
27. De La Tour, A., Glachant, M., Ménière, Y., Innovation and international technology transfer: the case of the Chinese photovoltaics industry. Energy policy 39:2 (2011), 761–770.
28. Demirkan, I., Deeds, D.L., Evolution of research collaboration networks and their impact on firm innovation output. Aharonson, B., Stettner, U., Aharonson, B.S., Amburgey, T.L., Ellis, S., Drori, I., (eds.) Understanding the Relationship Between Networks and Technology, Creativity and Innovation, 2013, Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, 67–96.
29. Dodgson, M., Gann, D.M., Salter, A., The Management of Technological Innovation: Strategy and Practice. 2008, Oxford University Press, New York.
30. Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L., The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and Mode 2 to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Res. Policy 29:2 (2000), 109–123.
31. Everett, M.G., Borgatti, S.P., The centrality of groups and classes. J. Math. Sociol. 23:3 (1999), 181–201.
32. Fier, A., Aschhoff, B., Löhlein, H., Behavioural additionality of public R&D funding in Germany. OECD, (eds.) Government R&D Funding and Company Behaviour: Measuring Behavioural Additionality, 2006, OECD Publishing, 127–149.
33. Garcia-Vega, M., Does technological diversification promote innovation?: An empirical analysis for European firms. Res. Policy 35:2 (2006), 230–246.
34. Gilsing, V., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., van den Oord, A., Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: technological distance, betweenness centrality and density. Res. Policy 37:10 (2008), 1717–1731.
35. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. Moed, H.F., Glänzel, W., Schmoch, U., (eds.) Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, 2005, Springer, 257–276.
36. Grant, R.M., The knowledge-based view of the firm: implications for management practice. Long Range Plann. 30:3 (1997), 450–454.
37. Guan, J., Liu, N., Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: a patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy. Res. Policy 45:1 (2016), 97–112.
38. Gulati, R., Gargiulo, M., Where do interorganizational networks come from? 1. Am. J. Sociol. 104:5 (1999), 1439–1493.
39. Heinze, T., Kuhlmann, S., Across institutional boundaries?: Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience. Res. Policy 37:5 (2008), 888–899.
40. Jaffe, A.B., Stavins, R.N., The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology. Resour. Energy Econ. 16:2 (1994), 91–122.
41. Katz, J.S., Martin, B.R., What is research collaboration?. Res. Policy 26:1 (1997), 1–18.
42. Knoben, J., Oerlemans, L.A., Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration: a literature review. Int. J. Manage. Rev. 8:2 (2006), 71–89.
43. Kogut, B., The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strateg. Manage. J. 21:3 (2000), 405–425.
44. Lee, S., Bozeman, B., The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc. Stud. Sci. 35:5 (2005), 673–702.
45. Liegsalz, J., Wagner, S., Patent examination at the state intellectual property office in China. Res. Policy 42:2 (2013), 552–563.
46. Nelson, A.J., Measuring knowledge spillovers: what patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion. Res. Policy 38:6 (2009), 994–1005.
47. Oerlemans, L.A., Knoben, J., Pretorius, M.W., Alliance portfolio diversity, radical and incremental innovation: the moderating role of technology management. Technovation 33:6 (2013), 234–246.
48. Petruzzelli, A.M., The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university–industry collaborations: a joint-patent analysis. Technovation 31:7 (2011), 309–319.
49. Phelps, C.C., A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation. Acad. Manage. J. 53:4 (2010), 890–913.
50. Poirier, E., Forgnes, D., Staub-French, S., Collaboration through innovation: implications for expertise in the AEC sector. Constr. Manage. Econ. 34:11 (2016), 769–789.
51. Ponds, R., Van Oort, F., Frenken, K., The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Pap. Reg. Sci. 86:3 (2007), 423–443.
52. Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., Smith-Doerr, L., Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology?. Adm. Sci. Q. 41:1 (1996), 116–145.
53. Powell, W.W., White, D.R., Koput, K.W., Owen-Smith, J., Network dynamics and field evolution: the growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. Am. J. Sociol. 110:4 (2005), 1132–1205.
54. Powers, J.B., McDougall, P., Policy orientation effects on performance with licensing to start-ups and small companies. Res. Policy 34:7 (2005), 1028–1042.
55. Protogerou, A., Caloghirou, Y., Siokas, E., Twenty-five years of science-industry collaboration: the emergence and evolution of policy-driven research networks across Europe. J. Technol. Transfer 38:6 (2013), 873–895.
56. Quintana-García, C., Benavides-Velasco, C.A., Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: the influence of technological diversification. Res. Policy 37:3 (2008), 492–507.
57. Rosenkopf, L., Padula, G., Investigating the microstructure of network evolution: alliance formation in the mobile communications industry. Organ. Sci. 19:5 (2008), 669–687.
58. Schilling, M.A., Phelps, C.C., Interfirm collaboration networks: the impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Manage. Sci. 53:7 (2007), 1113–1126.
59. Snijders, Tom A.B., Steglich, Christian E.G., Schweinberger, Michael, Huisman, Mark, Manual for SIENA Version 3.2. 2009, University of Groningen, ICS. University of Oxford, Department of Statistics, Groningen. Oxford http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/siena/.
60. Snijders, T.A., Van de Bunt, G.G., Steglich, C.E., Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc. Netw. 32:1 (2010), 44–60.
61. Stuart, T.E., Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strateg. Manage. J. 21:8 (2000), 791–811.
62. Sun, H., Zhi, Q., Wang, Y., Yao, Q., Su, J., China's solar photovoltaic industry development: the status quo problems and approaches. Appl. Energy 118 (2014), 221–230.
63. Ter Wal, A.L., The dynamics of the inventor network in German biotechnology: geographic proximity versus triadic closure. J. Econ. Geogr., 2014, 589–620.
64. Torre, A., On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transmission. Reg. Stud. 42:6 (2008), 869–889.
65. Torres-Reyna, O., Panel Data Analysis Fixed & Random Effects. Princeton University, Data and Statistical Services Presentation. 2011 (Retrieved from http://www.princeton.edu/∼otorres/Panel101.pdf).
66. Ubfal, D., Maffioli, A., The impact of funding on research collaboration: evidence from a developing country. Res. Policy 40:9 (2011), 1269–1279.
67. Uzzi, B., Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Adm. Sci. Q. 42:1 (1997), 35–67.
68. Van Noorden, R., China tops europe in R&D intensity. Nature, 505(7482), 2014, 144.
69. Van de Bunt, G.G., Groenewegen, P., An actor-oriented dynamic network approach the case of interorganizational network evolution. Organ. Res. Methods 10:3 (2007), 463–482.
70. Vanhaverbeke, W., Gilsing, V., Beerkens, B., Duysters, G., Exploration and Exploitation in Technology-based Alliance Networks (Working Paper No. 2007-020). 2007, United Nations University, MERIT (Retrieved from http://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2007/wp 2007-020.pdf).
71. Villani, E., Rasmussen, E., Grimaldi, R., How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: a proximity approach. Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change 114 (2017), 86–102.
72. Wang, C., Rodan, S., Fruin, M., Xu, X., Knowledge networks, collaboration networks, and exploratory innovation. Acad. Manage. J. 57:2 (2014), 484–514.
73. Wong, P.K., Singh, A., Do co-publications with industry lead to higher levels of university technology commercialization activity?. Scientometrics 97:2 (2013), 245–265.
74. Wu, C.Y., Mathews, J.A., Knowledge flows in the solar photovoltaics industry: insights from patenting by Taiwan, Korea, and China. Res. Policy 41:3 (2012), 524–540.
75. Ynalvez, M.A., Shrum, W.M., Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. Res. Policy 40:2 (2011), 204–216.