税收激励政策对企业创新绩效的影响研究
|
摘要
对正处于新一轮跨越式发展关键时期的中国来说,创新是推动经济结构调整和增长方式转变的关键环节,是实现社会经济持续协调快速发展的核心动力。企业作为创新体系的主体,其创新活动在提升国家创新能力过程中具有重要战略地位。但国家相关部门统计数据显示,尽管我国企业的R&D投入强度保持一定上升趋势,但与发达国家仍有较大差距,而且对外技术有较高的依存度,国内拥有自主知识产权核心技术的企业极少。这都表明我国企业创新能力还较为薄弱。然而,企业创新活动会受到其自身经济特性的影响,市场失灵的存在使得市场机制未能实现资源的最优化配置,因此政府有必要加以干预,为激发企业的创新动力提供良好的政策环境。税收激励由于更倾向于利用企业和市场的力量,具有普惠性,因而被世界各国政府普遍采用。本文从企业微观角度研究税收激励政策对创新绩效的影响,进一步丰富我国有关企业创新的研究的同时,能够为政府政策制定提供合理参考,更为重要的是,可以使企业在经营实践过程中有针对性的选取适宜的优惠措施服务于企业创新活动。
根据研究主题,本文采用文献资料法、内容分析法、问卷调查法及统计分析法,依照提出问题、分析问题和解决问题的思路,从如下四个方面就税收激励政策对企业创新绩效的影响进行研究：(1)通过文献与资料的梳理,回顾以往学者对税收激励政策和创新绩效的相关研究,了解我国企业创新活动现状及问题,明晰我国税收优惠政策的发展历程与特征；(2)基于经济增长理论分析税收激励政策对创新投入及其对创新绩效的影响机理,构建相应概念模型；(3)采用问卷调查方式收集数据,对税收激励政策、创新投入和创新绩效量表进行信度和效度检验,运用逐步回归分析方法对理论模型和研究假设进行检验,并运用上市公司公开数据进一步论证；(4)通过对我国与主要发达国家现行税收优惠政策的对比分析,并结合实证数据检验结果,提出提升我国创新税收政策激励效应的建议。
本文从创新投入的视角切入对税收激励政策与企业创新绩效之间的关系展开研究,建立了“税收激励政策——创新投入——创新绩效”的概念模型,并提出税收激励政策通过创新投入中的资金投入和人力投入对企业创新绩效产生影响的各项理论假设。本研究通过对我国301家企业问卷调查数据以及281家上市公司公开数据进行实证检验,分析结果表明税收激励政策能够影响企业对创新活动的资金与人力投入,并进而对创新绩效产生作用。主要研究结论如下：
(1)税收激励政策对企业创新活动的资金投入与人力投入有显著的正向效应。从相关系数的大小来看,税收激励政策对企业的人力投入有更强的激励效应。
(2)企业对创新活动的资金与人力投入对创新绩效有显著的正向效应,说明充足的资金支持是企业实施创新的关键要素,而企业对员工人力资本的投入同样是开展创新活动的重要因素。
(3)创新投入是税收激励政策影响企业创新绩效的完全中介变量。税收激励政策与企业创新绩效之间具有显著的正相关关系,而在加入创新投入变量后,创新投入与企业创新绩效之间仍旧具有显著的正相关关系,而税收激励与创新绩效之间的关系变为不显著,说明税收激励政策通过影响企业对创新活动的投入从而对创新绩效产生效应,即创新投入在税收激励政策与企业创新绩效的关系中起完全中介效应。
(4)从税收激励政策选用的税种来看,企业所得税优惠对企业创新活动的资金投入具有显著的正向影响,而对人力投入的激励作用并不显著；以增值税和营业税为代表的流转税类优惠则对企业人力投入具有显著的解释能力,而与资金投入之间并未有显著的相关关系。从税收激励政策的优惠方式来看,与直接优惠方式相比,间接优惠方式对企业开展创新活动的资金投入与人力投入具有更为有效的激励作用,均呈现显著的正相关关系。尽管税收激励政策对企业开展创新活动的资金与人力投入具有促进作用,但具体到每一项税收激励工具,对企业创新投入的促进作用以及效果是不同的。因此,为了充分发挥税收激励政策的效用,需要根据不同优惠政策的适用范围进行合理的规划与选择,否则会降低税收激励政策的有效性。
本文的创新点主要体现在以下三个方面：
(1)构建税收激励政策通过创新投入对企业创新绩效产生影响的概念模型。本文在系统分析税收激励政策相关研究文献的基础上,提出税收激励政策通过影响创新投入而对企业创新绩效产生效应的概念模型。以往学者多将企业R&D投入作为影响创新绩效的重要因素,尽管众多研究证实税收优惠政策对R&D投入具有激励效应,但甚少有文献从税收激励视角切入,系统研究税收政策对企业创新绩效的影响机理。因此,本文关注税收激励政策如何通过资金投入和人力投入对创新绩效产生影响,在一定程度上丰富了有关企业创新绩效的研究成果。
(2)运用问卷调查与上市公司公开数据相结合的方式检验不同类型税收优惠政策的激励效应。以往学者多采用问卷调查方式研究税收政策的相关命题。本文首先通过问卷调查数据实证验证创新投入在税收激励政策对企业创新绩效的影响过程中起到完全中介作用。在此研究结论的基础上,运用上市公司公开数据针对不同税种和优惠方式的税收激励政策进一步展开实证检验,分析各项政策对企业资金投入和人力投入的不同激励效应,使得研究结论更具可信度。
(3)系统梳理我国创新税收激励政策发展历程及主要发达国家现行创新税收激励政策。本文全面收集1978～2012年政府发布有关创新的税收激励政策,并在文本信息基础上从政策年度、激励税种、激励对象、激励方式和激励环节五个方面对政策进行量化归类,按照不同时期政策的特点将其划分为四个阶段,有利于明晰我国税收激励政策的发展历程及不同阶段的特征。目前我国较缺乏此类研究。此外,由于科技活动日新月异的变化以及企业创新能力的提升,一些激励政策已与政府的政策目标不相匹配,许多国家也在修订已有的税收激励措施。以往学者对外国政策的整理多直接借鉴前人文献,在政策内容上具有较强时滞性。本文从各国政府网站中直接获取相关税收法案中有关创新的条款,对我国及主要发达国家现行有效创新税收优惠政策进行系统梳理,通过比较分析我国与发达国家税收优惠政策的特点,提出提升我国创新税收政策激励效应的有关建议,对企业结合实际情况选择适宜政策从而保障创新活动顺利开展有较好的借鉴意义。
Innovation is the key link to regulate economic structure and shift the way of economic growth, and also the centre power of China social economic fast and sustainable development, especially in the critical period of a new round of great-leap-forward development. The principal part of innovation system is enterprises, and its innovation activities play important strategic position in promoting country's innovation ability. But the statistics from related department in our country show that, although the enterprises in our country maintain rising trend in R&D input intensity, there is still a large gap comparing with the developed country, and depends on foreign technology highly, there is rarely company which has the independent intellectual property and core technology in the country. This suggests that the innovation ability of our country's enterprises is still extremely weak. However, enterprise innovation activities will be influenced by its own economic characteristics, and the existence of market failure that makes the market mechanism failing to achieve the optimal allocation of resources, the government need to intervene and provide a good policy environment to arouse the innovation power of the enterprises. Tax incentives are adopted by governments around the world as they are more likely inclusive and to use the enterprise and market forces. This article studying the effect of tax incentives to innovation performance from the microscopic perspective of enterprise, further enrich the research on enterprise innovation, and provide reasonable reference for government policy making at the same time, and more importantly, it can help the enterprise selects appropriate incentives to serve the enterprise innovation activities in the process of business practice.
According to the topic, using the literature material method, content analysis, questionnaire investigation and statistical analysis method, the article studies that how tax incentive policies affect mechanism of innovation performance from the following aspects in accordance with logic of asking questions, analyzing and solving the problems:(1) To review previous research on tax incentives and innovation performance, understand the current situation and problems of enterprise innovation activities, and clarify the development process and characteristics of the preferential tax policy in our country.(2) Based on the economic growth theory, to analysis how tax incentives affect innovation performance through innovation input, and build the appropriate conceptual model.(3) To collect data by means of questionnaire survey on tax incentives, innovation input and innovation performance, test the scale reliability, validity and confirm the theoretical model and research assumptions with the stepwise regression analysis method, then use the listed company data to do further argument.(4) To contrast the current preferential tax policy with main developed countries, and propose suggestions on promoting the incentive effects of tax policy combing with the empirical results.
This paper researches the relationship between the tax incentives and enterprise innovation performance from the visual angle of innovation input. The framework of "tax incentives-innovation input-innovation performance" is established and theoretical assumptions on tax policy affecting innovation performance through capital and labor investment are put forward. The questionnaire survey data of301enterprises as well as public data of281listed companies are used to do empirical test. Analysis results show that tax incentive policy can affect the enterprise capital and labor input, and further have effect on innovation performance. Main research conclusions are as follows:
(1) Tax incentives have significant positive effect on capital and labor input of corporate innovation activities. From the perspective of the correlation coefficient, the intensity on labor input is stronger than on capital investment.
(2) Capital and labor input of innovation activities has significant positive effect on innovation performance, shows that adequate funding is the key element for implementation of innovation, also the human capital investment is.
(3) Innovation input is a complete intermediary variable between tax incentives and innovation performance. After joining innovation input variables, the significant positive correlation between tax policy and innovation performance becomes non-significant, but innovation input still has significant positive effect on innovation performance. This shows tax incentives influencing the enterprise input of innovation activities, so as to affect innovation performance, namely the innovation input variables play full mediation.
(4) From the perspective of tax categories, corporate income tax preferential treatment has significant positive effect on capital input and is non-significant with labor input. Turnover tax that represented by value added tax and business tax has significant explanatory ability to enterprise labor input but no significant correlation with capital investment. From the way of tax incentive policy, indirect preferential way has more effective incentive effect on capital and labor investment for carrying out incentive activities compared with direct preferential way. With regard to specific policies, they have different effect on promoting innovation input. Therefore, enterprises need to reasonably select these policies according to the scope of application in order to make full use of the effectiveness.
The innovation point is mainly manifested in the following three aspects:
(1) Build the conceptual model that tax incentives impact on the enterprise innovation performance through innovation input. Based on the systematic analysis of research literature related to tax incentives, the appropriate conceptual model that tax incentives influence the innovation input and then have effect on innovation performance is established. R&D expenditures variable is seemed as important factor which may affect innovation performance in many previous literatures. Although numerous studies have confirmed the tax policy has incentive effect on R&D expenditures, few literature study the mechanism between preferential tax policy and innovation performance from the visual angles of tax incentive. Therefore, this paper focuses on how tax incentives act on innovation performance through the intermediation of capital and labor input, and to some extent enriches the research on enterprise innovation performance.
(2) Test incentive effects of different types of preferential tax policies by using questionnaire survey and public data of listed companies. Many previous literatures adopt questionnaire investigation to research tax policy. The paper firstly uses questionnaire survey data to validate the full mediation of innovation input between tax incentives and innovation performance. On the basis of that research conclusion, we develop further empirical test on different tax categories and preferential way and analyze the different incentive effect of various policies on capital and labor input, which can make the results more credibility.
(3) Sort out the development of tax incentive policy in our country as well as the main developed countries. This article comprehensively collects the tax incentive policy about innovation during1978～2012, and categorizes these policies by the annual, tax type of incentives, incentive objects, motivational methods and encouraged link, then divides the development into four stages according to the characteristics of policy in different periods, which is conducive to clear the development of tax incentive policy in our country and the characteristics of different stages. And our country is relatively lack of such studies at present. In addition, as the activities of science and technology change quickly, and enterprises improve innovation ability, some incentives can't match with the policy objective, so many countries are revising the existing tax incentives. Much more researches about organizing the foreign policies directly refer to the previous literatures, and are quite "time lag". This article obtains the terms of the innovation in tax law directly from the governments website, and sort out the development of tax incentive policy in our country as well as the main developed countries, then put forward some suggestions to improve the innovation incentive effects of the tax policy in our country, according to comparative analysis of the characteristics of the tax incentive policy between our country and developed countries, which are significant for the enterprise combining practice to choose suitable policy ensuring innovation.
根据研究主题,本文采用文献资料法、内容分析法、问卷调查法及统计分析法,依照提出问题、分析问题和解决问题的思路,从如下四个方面就税收激励政策对企业创新绩效的影响进行研究：(1)通过文献与资料的梳理,回顾以往学者对税收激励政策和创新绩效的相关研究,了解我国企业创新活动现状及问题,明晰我国税收优惠政策的发展历程与特征；(2)基于经济增长理论分析税收激励政策对创新投入及其对创新绩效的影响机理,构建相应概念模型；(3)采用问卷调查方式收集数据,对税收激励政策、创新投入和创新绩效量表进行信度和效度检验,运用逐步回归分析方法对理论模型和研究假设进行检验,并运用上市公司公开数据进一步论证；(4)通过对我国与主要发达国家现行税收优惠政策的对比分析,并结合实证数据检验结果,提出提升我国创新税收政策激励效应的建议。
本文从创新投入的视角切入对税收激励政策与企业创新绩效之间的关系展开研究,建立了“税收激励政策——创新投入——创新绩效”的概念模型,并提出税收激励政策通过创新投入中的资金投入和人力投入对企业创新绩效产生影响的各项理论假设。本研究通过对我国301家企业问卷调查数据以及281家上市公司公开数据进行实证检验,分析结果表明税收激励政策能够影响企业对创新活动的资金与人力投入,并进而对创新绩效产生作用。主要研究结论如下：
(1)税收激励政策对企业创新活动的资金投入与人力投入有显著的正向效应。从相关系数的大小来看,税收激励政策对企业的人力投入有更强的激励效应。
(2)企业对创新活动的资金与人力投入对创新绩效有显著的正向效应,说明充足的资金支持是企业实施创新的关键要素,而企业对员工人力资本的投入同样是开展创新活动的重要因素。
(3)创新投入是税收激励政策影响企业创新绩效的完全中介变量。税收激励政策与企业创新绩效之间具有显著的正相关关系,而在加入创新投入变量后,创新投入与企业创新绩效之间仍旧具有显著的正相关关系,而税收激励与创新绩效之间的关系变为不显著,说明税收激励政策通过影响企业对创新活动的投入从而对创新绩效产生效应,即创新投入在税收激励政策与企业创新绩效的关系中起完全中介效应。
(4)从税收激励政策选用的税种来看,企业所得税优惠对企业创新活动的资金投入具有显著的正向影响,而对人力投入的激励作用并不显著；以增值税和营业税为代表的流转税类优惠则对企业人力投入具有显著的解释能力,而与资金投入之间并未有显著的相关关系。从税收激励政策的优惠方式来看,与直接优惠方式相比,间接优惠方式对企业开展创新活动的资金投入与人力投入具有更为有效的激励作用,均呈现显著的正相关关系。尽管税收激励政策对企业开展创新活动的资金与人力投入具有促进作用,但具体到每一项税收激励工具,对企业创新投入的促进作用以及效果是不同的。因此,为了充分发挥税收激励政策的效用,需要根据不同优惠政策的适用范围进行合理的规划与选择,否则会降低税收激励政策的有效性。
本文的创新点主要体现在以下三个方面：
(1)构建税收激励政策通过创新投入对企业创新绩效产生影响的概念模型。本文在系统分析税收激励政策相关研究文献的基础上,提出税收激励政策通过影响创新投入而对企业创新绩效产生效应的概念模型。以往学者多将企业R&D投入作为影响创新绩效的重要因素,尽管众多研究证实税收优惠政策对R&D投入具有激励效应,但甚少有文献从税收激励视角切入,系统研究税收政策对企业创新绩效的影响机理。因此,本文关注税收激励政策如何通过资金投入和人力投入对创新绩效产生影响,在一定程度上丰富了有关企业创新绩效的研究成果。
(2)运用问卷调查与上市公司公开数据相结合的方式检验不同类型税收优惠政策的激励效应。以往学者多采用问卷调查方式研究税收政策的相关命题。本文首先通过问卷调查数据实证验证创新投入在税收激励政策对企业创新绩效的影响过程中起到完全中介作用。在此研究结论的基础上,运用上市公司公开数据针对不同税种和优惠方式的税收激励政策进一步展开实证检验,分析各项政策对企业资金投入和人力投入的不同激励效应,使得研究结论更具可信度。
(3)系统梳理我国创新税收激励政策发展历程及主要发达国家现行创新税收激励政策。本文全面收集1978～2012年政府发布有关创新的税收激励政策,并在文本信息基础上从政策年度、激励税种、激励对象、激励方式和激励环节五个方面对政策进行量化归类,按照不同时期政策的特点将其划分为四个阶段,有利于明晰我国税收激励政策的发展历程及不同阶段的特征。目前我国较缺乏此类研究。此外,由于科技活动日新月异的变化以及企业创新能力的提升,一些激励政策已与政府的政策目标不相匹配,许多国家也在修订已有的税收激励措施。以往学者对外国政策的整理多直接借鉴前人文献,在政策内容上具有较强时滞性。本文从各国政府网站中直接获取相关税收法案中有关创新的条款,对我国及主要发达国家现行有效创新税收优惠政策进行系统梳理,通过比较分析我国与发达国家税收优惠政策的特点,提出提升我国创新税收政策激励效应的有关建议,对企业结合实际情况选择适宜政策从而保障创新活动顺利开展有较好的借鉴意义。
Innovation is the key link to regulate economic structure and shift the way of economic growth, and also the centre power of China social economic fast and sustainable development, especially in the critical period of a new round of great-leap-forward development. The principal part of innovation system is enterprises, and its innovation activities play important strategic position in promoting country's innovation ability. But the statistics from related department in our country show that, although the enterprises in our country maintain rising trend in R&D input intensity, there is still a large gap comparing with the developed country, and depends on foreign technology highly, there is rarely company which has the independent intellectual property and core technology in the country. This suggests that the innovation ability of our country's enterprises is still extremely weak. However, enterprise innovation activities will be influenced by its own economic characteristics, and the existence of market failure that makes the market mechanism failing to achieve the optimal allocation of resources, the government need to intervene and provide a good policy environment to arouse the innovation power of the enterprises. Tax incentives are adopted by governments around the world as they are more likely inclusive and to use the enterprise and market forces. This article studying the effect of tax incentives to innovation performance from the microscopic perspective of enterprise, further enrich the research on enterprise innovation, and provide reasonable reference for government policy making at the same time, and more importantly, it can help the enterprise selects appropriate incentives to serve the enterprise innovation activities in the process of business practice.
According to the topic, using the literature material method, content analysis, questionnaire investigation and statistical analysis method, the article studies that how tax incentive policies affect mechanism of innovation performance from the following aspects in accordance with logic of asking questions, analyzing and solving the problems:(1) To review previous research on tax incentives and innovation performance, understand the current situation and problems of enterprise innovation activities, and clarify the development process and characteristics of the preferential tax policy in our country.(2) Based on the economic growth theory, to analysis how tax incentives affect innovation performance through innovation input, and build the appropriate conceptual model.(3) To collect data by means of questionnaire survey on tax incentives, innovation input and innovation performance, test the scale reliability, validity and confirm the theoretical model and research assumptions with the stepwise regression analysis method, then use the listed company data to do further argument.(4) To contrast the current preferential tax policy with main developed countries, and propose suggestions on promoting the incentive effects of tax policy combing with the empirical results.
This paper researches the relationship between the tax incentives and enterprise innovation performance from the visual angle of innovation input. The framework of "tax incentives-innovation input-innovation performance" is established and theoretical assumptions on tax policy affecting innovation performance through capital and labor investment are put forward. The questionnaire survey data of301enterprises as well as public data of281listed companies are used to do empirical test. Analysis results show that tax incentive policy can affect the enterprise capital and labor input, and further have effect on innovation performance. Main research conclusions are as follows:
(1) Tax incentives have significant positive effect on capital and labor input of corporate innovation activities. From the perspective of the correlation coefficient, the intensity on labor input is stronger than on capital investment.
(2) Capital and labor input of innovation activities has significant positive effect on innovation performance, shows that adequate funding is the key element for implementation of innovation, also the human capital investment is.
(3) Innovation input is a complete intermediary variable between tax incentives and innovation performance. After joining innovation input variables, the significant positive correlation between tax policy and innovation performance becomes non-significant, but innovation input still has significant positive effect on innovation performance. This shows tax incentives influencing the enterprise input of innovation activities, so as to affect innovation performance, namely the innovation input variables play full mediation.
(4) From the perspective of tax categories, corporate income tax preferential treatment has significant positive effect on capital input and is non-significant with labor input. Turnover tax that represented by value added tax and business tax has significant explanatory ability to enterprise labor input but no significant correlation with capital investment. From the way of tax incentive policy, indirect preferential way has more effective incentive effect on capital and labor investment for carrying out incentive activities compared with direct preferential way. With regard to specific policies, they have different effect on promoting innovation input. Therefore, enterprises need to reasonably select these policies according to the scope of application in order to make full use of the effectiveness.
The innovation point is mainly manifested in the following three aspects:
(1) Build the conceptual model that tax incentives impact on the enterprise innovation performance through innovation input. Based on the systematic analysis of research literature related to tax incentives, the appropriate conceptual model that tax incentives influence the innovation input and then have effect on innovation performance is established. R&D expenditures variable is seemed as important factor which may affect innovation performance in many previous literatures. Although numerous studies have confirmed the tax policy has incentive effect on R&D expenditures, few literature study the mechanism between preferential tax policy and innovation performance from the visual angles of tax incentive. Therefore, this paper focuses on how tax incentives act on innovation performance through the intermediation of capital and labor input, and to some extent enriches the research on enterprise innovation performance.
(2) Test incentive effects of different types of preferential tax policies by using questionnaire survey and public data of listed companies. Many previous literatures adopt questionnaire investigation to research tax policy. The paper firstly uses questionnaire survey data to validate the full mediation of innovation input between tax incentives and innovation performance. On the basis of that research conclusion, we develop further empirical test on different tax categories and preferential way and analyze the different incentive effect of various policies on capital and labor input, which can make the results more credibility.
(3) Sort out the development of tax incentive policy in our country as well as the main developed countries. This article comprehensively collects the tax incentive policy about innovation during1978～2012, and categorizes these policies by the annual, tax type of incentives, incentive objects, motivational methods and encouraged link, then divides the development into four stages according to the characteristics of policy in different periods, which is conducive to clear the development of tax incentive policy in our country and the characteristics of different stages. And our country is relatively lack of such studies at present. In addition, as the activities of science and technology change quickly, and enterprises improve innovation ability, some incentives can't match with the policy objective, so many countries are revising the existing tax incentives. Much more researches about organizing the foreign policies directly refer to the previous literatures, and are quite "time lag". This article obtains the terms of the innovation in tax law directly from the governments website, and sort out the development of tax incentive policy in our country as well as the main developed countries, then put forward some suggestions to improve the innovation incentive effects of the tax policy in our country, according to comparative analysis of the characteristics of the tax incentive policy between our country and developed countries, which are significant for the enterprise combining practice to choose suitable policy ensuring innovation.
引文
4 数据来源OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/744214584778
5 数据来源Warda J. Tax Treatment of Business Investments in Intellectual Assets:An International Comparison [R]. STI Working Paper,2006(4).
6 2001-2002年和1999-2000年的数据来源OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development:Trends and Issues [R].STI Working Papers.2003
[1]安同良,施浩,Ludovico Alcorta.中国制造业企业R&D行为模式的观测与实证——基于江苏省制造业企业问卷调查的实证分析[J].经济研究.2006(6)：21-56.
[2]安沃·沙赫.促进投资与创新的财政激励[M].北京：经济科学出版社.2000：286-289.
[3]包健.高新技术产业发展的税收优惠政策分析[J].科学管理研究.2008(5)：106-108.
[4]宝贡敏,杨静.企业技术管理在技术创新中的角色——基于浙江省企业的研究[J].科学学研究.2004(5)：546-551.
[5]曹燕萍,刘雅利.论企业科技创新中“试错”的税收宽容[J].财经理论与实践.2009(1)：74-78.
[6]陈海波.企业R&D投入绩效影响因素的实证分析——基于江苏省企业创新调查数据[J].科技进步与对策.2011(11)：63-66.
[7]陈艳珍.我国现行创新激励税收政策的问题分析及政策建议[J].经济问题.2008(9)：98-100.
[8]陈柳钦,杨艺.促进我国高新技术产业发展的税收政策研究[J].经济纵横.2006(2)：14-17.
[9]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放式创新促进创新绩效的机理研究[J].科研管理.2009(4)：1-9.
[10]陈劲,陈钰芬.企业技术创新绩效评价指标体系研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2006(3)：86-91.
[11]陈勇星,秦秋英,李由胜.中小企业技术创新模式选择策略[J].统计与决策.2008(8)：175-177.
[12]陈伟,张旭梅.供应链伙伴特性、知识交易与创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].科研管理.2011(11)：7-17.
[13]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放度对企业技术创新绩效的影响[J].科学学研究.2008(2)：419-426.
[14]崔宁宁,高宇.吸收能力对创新模式选择影响的研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(11)：111-117.
[15]初大智,杨硕,崔世娟.技术合作对创新绩效的影响研究——以广东省制造业为例[J].中国软科学.2011(8)：155-164.
[16]戴晨,刘怡.税收优惠与财政补贴对企业R&D影响的比较分析[J].经济科学.2008(3)：58-71.
[17]戴勇,朱桂龙,肖丁丁.内部社会资本、知识流动与创新——基于省级技术中心企业的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2011(7)：1046-1055.
[18]丁宝军,朱桂龙.基于知识结构的R&D投入与技术创新绩效关系的实证分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2008(9)：29-34.
[19]范柏乃.而向自主创新的财税激励政策研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
[20]樊钱涛.知识源、知识获取方式与产业创新绩效研究——以中国高技术产业为例[J].科研管理.2011(5)：29-35.
[21]方刚.网络能力结构及对企业创新绩效作用机制研究[J].科学学研究.2011(3)：461-470.
[22]冯文娜.高新技术企业研发投入与创新产出的关系研究——基于山东省高新技术企业的实证[J].经济问题.2010(9)：74-78.
[23]高楠.大中型企业R&D投入与创新绩效灰色关联度分析——基于河北省和全国的比较[J].现代商贸工业.2010(6)：1-2.
[24]高建,汪剑飞,魏平.企业技术创新绩效指标：现状、问题和新概念模型[J].科研管理.2004(S 1)：14-22.
[25]高山行,谢言,王玉玺.企业R&D能力、外部环境不确定性对合作创新模式选择的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2009(6)：932-940.
[26]官建成,刘顺忠.区域创新机构对创新绩效影响的研究[J].科学学研究.2003(2)：210-214.
[27]郭玉清,姜磊,李永宁.中国财政创新激励政策的增长绩效分析[J].当代经济科学.2009(3)：1-124.
[28]何悦,朱桂龙,戴勇.企业创新绩效影响因素的系统动力学研究[J].软科学.2010(7)：19-23.
[29]贺明,夏恩君,刘伊雯.中关村科技园区高新技术企业技术创新模式研究[J].科技进步与对策.2010(3)：9-11.
[30]侯作前.全球中小企业税收优惠制度改革及借鉴[J].财贸研究.2009(6)：70-74.
[31]黄萃,苏竣,施丽萍,程啸天.中国高新技术产业税收优惠政策文本量化研究[J].科研管理.2011(10)：46-96.
[32]黄国斌,田志康.促进科技创新的税收激励政策——英美等国的主要经验及其启示[J].经济管理.2008(Z2)：151-156.
[33]黄冠豪,张松.促进我国企业创新能力提高的税收激励政策研究[J].当代经济研究.2007(11)：62-65.
[34]黄永明,何伟.技术创新的税收激励：理论与实践[J].财政研究.2006(10)：47-49.
[35]胡卫,熊鸿军.R&D税收刺激——原理、评估方法与政策含义[J].管理科学.2005(1)：84-91.
[36]胡恩华.企业技术创新绩效的综合模糊评价及其应用[J].经济管理.2002(10)：54-57.
[37]蒋建军,齐建国.激励企业R&D支出的税收政策效应研究[J].中国软科学.2007(8)：65-70.
[38]江静.公共政策对企业创新支持的绩效——基于直接补贴与税收优惠的比较分析[J].科研管理.2011(4)：1-50.
[39]焦少飞,张炜,杨选良.技术体制、研发努力与创新绩效：来自中国制造业的证据[J].中国软科学.2010(5)：37-44.
[40]经济合作与发展组织,欧盟统计署.奥斯陆手册：创新数据的采集和解释指南[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社.2011：37-38.
[41]库姆斯,萨维奥蒂,沃尔什.经济学与技术进步[M].北京：商务印书馆,1989.
[42]匡小平,肖建华.我国自主创新能力培育的税收优惠政策整合——基于高新技术企业税收优惠的分析[J].财贸经济.2007(13)：51-55.
[43]李丽青,师萍,曾观群.中外激励企业R&D投入的税收优惠政策比较及思考[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2005(10)：22-25.
[44]李丽青.我国现行R&D税收优惠政策的有效性研究[J].中国软科学.2007(7)：115-120.
[45]李文.创新税收激励的国际比较与借鉴[J].税务研究.2007(4)：54-59.
[46]李林木.从国际比较看我国激励创新的税收政策选择[J].税务研究.2007(4)：50-53.
[47]李涛,黄晓蓓,王超.企业科研投入与经营绩效的实证研究——信息业与制造业上市公司的比较[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2008(7)：170-174.
[48]李新功.基于社会资本理论的企业技术创新模式研究[J].科学管理研究.2006(5)：9-12.
[49]李贞,杨洪涛.吸收能力、关系学习及知识整合对企业创新绩效的影响研究——来自科技型中小企业的实证研究[J].科研管理.2012(1)：79-89.
[50]李平.技术扩散理论及实证研究[M].山西：山西经济出版社.1999：33-42.
[51]李丽青.税收激励对企业R&D投资的影响[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2007(4)：29-32.
[52]林颖.促进科技创新的税收政策研究[J].税务研究.2007(1)：14-16.
[53]梁云凤.促进科技发展的税收对策[J].中央财经大学学报.2005(3)：6-9.
[54]梁莱歆,马如飞,田元飞.科技经费投入结构与企业技术创新——基于我国大中型工业企业的实证研究[J].科学管理研究.2009(4)：104-107.
[55]林春培,张振刚,田帅.基于企业技术能力和技术创新模式相互匹配的引进消化吸收再创新[J].中国科技论坛.2009(9)：47-51.
[56]柳剑平,郑绪涛,喻美辞.税收、补贴与R&D溢出效应分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2005(12)：81-90.
[57]柳光强,田文宠.完善促进战略性新兴产业发展的税收政策设想——从区域税收优惠到产业优惠[J].中央财经大学学报.2012(3)：1-5.
[58]刘溶沧.促进科技成果转化的税收政策探讨[J].中国工业经济.2000(6)：11-14.
[59]刘顺忠,官建成.区域创新系统创新绩效的评价[J].中国管理科学.2002(1)：76-79.
[60]刘满凤.我国各地区大中型工业企业技术创新绩效比较[J].统计与决策.2006(20)：74-76.
[61]刘和东.中国工业企业的创新绩效及影响因素研究——基于DEA-Tobit两步法的实证分析[J].山西财经大学学报.2010(3)：68-74.
[62]刘衡,李垣,李西垚,肖婷.关系资本、组织间沟通和创新绩效的关系研究[J].科学学研究.2010(12)：1912-1919.
[63]刘初旺.我国R&D税收激励程度的国际比较研究——基于B-index模型[J].财经论丛.2012(1)：40-47.
[64]龙静,黄勋敬,余志杨.政府支持行为对中小企业创新绩效的影响——服务性中介机构的作用[J].科学学研究.2012(5)：783-792.
[65]娄贺统.企业技术创新的税收激励效应研究[M].上海：立信会计出版社.2010：49.
[66]陆国庆.中国中小板上市公司产业创新的绩效研究[J].经济研究.2011(2)：138-148.
[67]罗亚非,李敦响.我国中部6省和京、沪、粤区域技术创新绩效比较研究[J].科技进步与对策.2006(1)：18-21.
[68]罗亚非,工海峰,范小阳.研发创新绩效评价的国际比较研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2010(3)：28-41.
[69]罗赳赳,田新民,康力.企业自主创新模式研究与选择[J].科技进步与对策.2007(5)：104-107.
[70]罗默.现代经济周期理论[M].北京：商务印书馆,1997.
[71]卢馨.企业人力资本、R&D与自主创新——基于高新技术上市企业的经验证据[J].暨南学报(哲学社会科学版).2013(1)：104-117.
[72]马伟红.税收激励与政府资助对企业R&D投入影响的实证研究——基于上市高新技术企业的面板数据[J].科技进步与对策.2011(17)：111-114.
[73]马海涛,姜爱华.促进科技成果转化与产业化的税收支持方式研究[J].税务研究.2010(8)：3-7.
[74]聂颖,杨志安.企业研发投资财税激励检验的实证分析[J].财经问题研究.2011(8)：103-108.
[75]彭灿,杨玲.技术能力、创新战略与创新绩效的关系研究[J].科研管理.2009(2)：26-32.
[76]彭红霞,达庆利.跨国公司人力资源系统、企业文化与创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].国际贸易问题.2007(4)：100-105.
[77]任胜刚.企业网络能力结构的测评及其对企业创新绩效的影响机制研究[J].南开管理评论.2010(1)：69-80.
[78]钱锡红,徐万里,杨永福.企业网络位置、间接联系与创新绩效[J].中国工业经济.2010(2)：78-88.
[79]任胜刚,宋迎春,王龙伟,曹裕.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究[J].中国工业经济.2010(4)：100-109.
[80]沈肇章,魏朗.影响高新技术企业税收优惠政策实施效果的因素分析——以东莞市为例[J].财贸经济.2009(5)：57-60.
[81]师萍,许治,张炳南.我国R&D投入绩效的实证研究[J].中国软科学.2007(6)：125-130.
[82]舒志彪,于君博,于永达.企业规模与企业创新产出关系的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2007(2)：21-26.
[83]宋河发,穆荣平,任中保.技术开发费150%税前加计扣除政策落实问题分析与对策研究[J].科学学研究.2009(12)：1822-1828.
[84]孙玮,成力为,刘栋.不同主体R&D投入与技术创新绩效变动差异——基于中国高技术产业的实证研究[J].山西财经大学学报.2009(10)：64-70.
[85]陶锋.吸收能力、价值链类型与创新绩效——基于国际代工联盟知识溢出的视角[J].中国工业经济.2011(1)：140-150.
[86]田盈,潘晓琳.基于加权主成分分析的企业技术创新绩效评价模型研究[J].科技进步与对策.2008(3)：130-133.
[87]王保进.窗口版SPSS与行为科学研究[M].台北：心理出版社,2002.
[88]干峰丽,蒋保林OECD国家R&D税收激励政策研究与经验借鉴[J].中国科技论坛.2005(4)：136-139.
[89]王俊.我国政府R&D税收优惠强度的测算及影响效应检验[J].科研管理.2011(9)：157-]64.
[90]王金营.人力资本与经济增长理论与实证[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社.2001：55.
[91]王玺,姜朋.鼓励自主创新的税收优惠政策探析[J].税务研究.2010(8)：12-15.
[92]工海花,谢富纪.开放式创新模式下组织间知识转移、环境动荡性对企业创新绩效的影响研究[J].科学管理研究.2012(3)：70-73.
[93]工青云,饶扬德.企业技术创新绩效的层次灰色综合评判模型[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2004(5)：55-62.
[94]王然,邓伟根.研发投入来源、技术溢出渠道与自主创新绩效——基于高技术行业面板数据的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2011(10)：6-9.
[95]王生辉.企业非突破性自主创新模式研究[J].科学管理研究.2007(3)：34-37.
[96]江碧瀛,杜跃平.企业技术创新模式的路径选择与实证分析[J].科技进步与对策.2006(9)：40-42.
[97]王红霞,高山行.基于资源利用的企业R&D投入与创新产出关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2009(2)：567-572.
[98]王玉荣,杨震宁,李军.竞争环境和技术战略对制造业创新绩效的影响[J].科研管理.2011(7)：25-44.
[99]吴秀波.税收激励对R&D投资的影响：实证分析与政策工具选拔[J].研究与发展管理.2003(1)：36-41.
[100]吴延兵,刘霞辉.人力资本与研发行为——基于民营企业调研数据的分析[J].经济学(季刊).2009(4)：1567-1590.
[101]吴明隆.问卷统计分析实务——SPSS操作与应用[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010.
[102]向刚,熊觅,李兴宽,等.创新型企业持续创新绩效评价研究[J].科技进步与对策.2011(8)：119-123.
[103]向坚,刘洪伟.技术创新绩效评价研究综述[J].科技进步与对策.2011(6)：155-160.
[104]肖鹏,黎一璇.所得税税收减免与企业研发支出关系的协整分析——基于全国54个国家级高新区的实证研究[J].中央财经大学学报.2011(8)：13-53.
[105]肖鹏,吴永红.企业研发投入的税收优惠政策差异：国际经验与启示[J].改革.2009(4)：91-97.
[106]谢科范,董芹芹,陈云.基于资源集成的自主创新模式辨析[J].科学学研究.2007(S1)：110-113.
[107]熊维勤.税收和补贴对R&D效率和规模的影响[J].科学学研究.2011(5)：698-706.
[108]徐伟民.科技政策与高新技术企业的R&D投入决策——来自上海的微观实证分析[J].上海经济研究.2009(5)：55-64.
[109]徐亮,张宗益,龙勇,周旭.竞合战略与技术创新绩效的实证研究[J].科研管理.2009(1)：87-96.
[110]徐博.促进我国自主科技创新的财税政策研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社.2010：63-64.
[111]许洁.促进科技型中小企业发展的财税政策分析[J].中国科技论坛.2004(1).
[112]薛镭,杨艳,朱恒源.战略导向对我国企业产品创新绩效的影响——一个高科技行业-非高科技行业企业的比较[J].科研管理.2011(12)：1-8.
[113]杨勇,达庆利.企业技术创新绩效与其规模、R&D投资、人力资本投资之间的关系——基于面板数据的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2007(11)：128-131.
[114]杨建君,梅晓芳,何颖.控制方式、创新承诺及创新模式选择关系研究[J].科学学研究.2008(S1)：202-208.
[115]杨建君,聂菁.寡头垄断企业技术创新模式选择——创新风险与技术类型的影响分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(11)：94-99.
[116]尹建海,杨建华.基于加强型平衡记分法的企业技术创新绩效评价指标体系研究[J].科研管理.2008(1)：1-7.
[117]袁旭梅,刘文智,孙微微.我国区域创新系统绩效研究进展[J].科学管理研究.2011(4)：37-41.
[118]于成永,施建军.研发模式选择及其对创新绩效的影响——一个研究综述[J].经济管理.2006(19)：6-11.
[119]曾德明,文金艳,禹献云.技术创新网络结构与创新类型配适对企业创新绩效的影响[J].软科学.2012(5)：1-9.
[120]詹·布坎南.民主财政论[M].北京：商务印书馆.1993：27.
[121]张明喜.促进企业自主创新的税收政策研究[J].中国科技论坛.2009(12)：28-47.
[122]张志超,刘喆,丁宏.关于调整、优化税制结构的理论思考[J].经济学动态.2008(7)：33-39.
[123]张鸿.促进高新技术产业发展的科技税收优惠政策研究[J].科学管理研究.2001(4)：62-68.
[124]张明喜.促进企业自主创新的税收政策研究[J].中国科技论坛.2009(12)：28-31.
[125]张涛,马亚红.中外R&D所得税税收激励政策比较与思考[J].经济管理.2008(19-20)：157-160.
[126]张方华.企业社会资本与技术创新绩效：概念模型与实证分析[J].研究与发展管理.2006(3)：47-53.
[127]张方华.网络嵌入影响企业创新绩效的概念模型与实证分析[J].中国工业经济.2010(4)：110-119.
[128]张方华.资源获取与技术创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2006(4)：635-640.
[129]支燕.创新能力、技术转化与创新绩效——来自我国电子信息业上市公司的实证[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(3)：96-99.
[130]周永红.开放型创新模式的衍生性制度要素及约束条件[J].科技进步与对策.2010(8)：51-54.
[131]周学军,易蓉,高燕.企业技术创新的关键成功因素分析[J].统计与决策.2008(22)：172-173.
[132]朱学冬,陈雅兰.创新型企业创新绩效评价研究——以福建省为例[J].中国科技论坛.2010(9)：77-82.
[133]朱平芳,徐伟民.政府的科技激励政策对大中型工业企业R&D投入及其专利产出的影响——上海市的实证研究[J].经济研究.2003(6)：45-94.
[134]朱云欢,张明喜.我国财政补贴对企业研发影响的经验分析[J].经济经纬.2010(5)：77-81.
[135]朱琪,李鸿玲.技术创新型人力资本对工业产业竞争力作用研究：以广东省为例[J].当代财经.2007(7)：75-80.
[136]朱瑜,王雁飞,蓝海林.企业文化、智力资本与组织绩效关系研究[J].科学学研究.2007(5)：952-958.
[137]Akgun A E, Keskin H, Byrne J. Organizational Emotional Capability, Product and Process Innovation, and Firm Performance:An Empirical Analysis [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,2009(26):103-130.
[138]Arrow K J. Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1962:609-626.
[139]Amabile T M, Conti R, Coon H, Lazenby J, Herron M. Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity[J]. The Academy of Management Journal,1996,39(5):1154-1184.
[140]Arthur J B. Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1994,37 (3):670-687.
[141]Asmussen E, Berriot C. Le credit d-impot recherche, coutet effet incitatif [J]. Ministere de l'Economie et des Finances. Paris, France.1993.
[142]Baily M.N, Lawrence R.Z. Tax Incentives for R&D:What Do the Data Tell Us? Study commissioned by the Council on Research and Technology. Washington DC.1992.
[143]Baker W E, Sinkula J M. The Synergistic Effect of Market Orientation and Learning Orientation on Organizational Performance [J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1999,27(4):411-427.
[144]Baumol W J. The Free-Market Innovation Machine:Analyzing the Growth Miracle of Capitalism [M]. Princeton:Princeton University Press,2002.
[145]Beenstock M. Taxation and Incentives in the UK[J]. Lloyds Bank Review,1979(134):1-15.
[146]Berman S A, Down J, Hill C W L. Tacit Knowledge as A Source of Competitive Advantage in the Notional Basketball Association[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2002,45 (1):13-31.
[147]Bernstein J.I. The Effect of Direct and Indirect Tax Incentives on Canadian Industrial R&D Expenditures[J]. Canadian Public Policy.1986 XII:438-448.
[148]Berger P. Explicit and Implicit Effects of the R&D Tax Credit [J]. Journal of Accounting Research.1993(31):131-171.
[149]Black S E, Lynch L M. Human-Capital Investments and Productivity[J]. American Economic Review,1996,86 (2):263-267.
[150]Bloom N, Griffith R, Van Reenen J. Do R&D Tax Credits Work? Evidence from a Panel of Countries 1979-1997[J]. Journal of Public Economics.2002(85):1-31.
[151]Brouwer E, Kleinknecht A. Innovative Output, and A Firm's Propensity to Patent:An Exploration of CSI Micro Data [J]. Research Policy,1999,28 (6):615-624.
[152]Burts R S. The Network Structure of Social Capital[J]. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2000(22):345-423.
[153]Chan L K C, Lakonishok J, Sougiannis T. The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,56 (6):2431-2456.
[154]Chengqi Wang, Kafouros M I. What Factors Determine Innovation Performance in Emerging Economies? Evidence from China[J]. International Business Review,2009(18): 606-616.
[155]Churchill G A. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs [J]. Journal of Marketing Research,1979,16(1):64-73.
[156]Chiesa V, Coughlan P, Voss C A. Development of a Technical Innovation Audit[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management,1996,13(2):105-136.
[157]Cloodt M, Hagedoorn J, Kranenburg H V. Mergers and Acquisitions:Their Effect on the Innovative Performance of Companies in High-tech Industries [J]. Research Policy,2006(35): 642-654.
[158]Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive Capacity:A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1):128-152.
[159]Cohen W M, Klepper S. A Reprise of Size and R&D[J]. The Economic Journal,1996(106): 925-951.
[160]Colazo J A. Collaboration Structure and Performance in New Software Development: Findings from the Study of Open Source Projects [J]. International Journal of Innovation Management,2010,14(5):735-758.
[161]Comanor W S. Market Structure, Product Differentiation, and Industrial Research [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1967,81 (4):639-657.
[162]Chih-Hai Yang, Chia-Hui Huang, Tong Chieh-Tse Hou. Tax Incentives and R&D Activity: Firm-Level Evidence from Taiwan [J]. Research Policy,2012,41 (9):1578-1588.
[163]Chung-Jen Chen, Jing-Wen Huang. Strategic Human Resource Practices and Innovation Performance:The mediating Role of Knowledge Management Capacity [J]. Journal of Business Research,2009(62):104-114.
[164]Czarnitzki D, Hanel P, Rosa J M. Evaluating the Impact of R&D Tax Credits on Innovation: A Microeconometric Study on Canadian Firms [J]. Research Policy,2011,40 (2):217-229.
[165]Dagenais M, Mohnen P, Thierrien P. Do Canadian Firms Respond to Fiscal Incentives to Research and Development? [J]. Tilburg University mimeo.1997.
[166]Dess G, Origer N K. Environment Structure and Consensus in Strategy Formulation:A Conceptual Integration [J]. Academy of Management Review,1987,12(2):313-330.
[167]D Jimenez-Jimenez, R Sanz-Valle. Innovation, Organizational Learning, and Performance [J]. Journal of Business Research,2011(64):408-417.
[168]Eberhart A C, Maxwell W F, Siddique A R. An Examination of Long-term Abnormal Stock Returns and Operating Performance Following R&D Increases[J]. Journal of Finance,2004(59): 623-650.
[169]Eckstein O. Tax Policy and Core Inflation:A Study Prepared for the Use of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States [M]. Washington:US Government Printing Office,1980.
[170]European Commission, Innovation Directory. Corporation Tax and Innovation:Issues at Stake and Review of European Union Experience in the Nineteen's [R]. European Commission, 2002(38).
[171]Farrell M J. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,1957,120(3):253-290.
[172]Frascati M. Main Definitions and Conventions for the Measurement of Research and Experimental Development (R&D)[R]. OECD/GD.1994(84):256-260.
[173]Garcia-Morales V J, Ruiz-Moreno A, Llorens-Montes F J. Effects of Technology Absorptive Capacity and Technology Proactivity on Organizational Learning, Innovation and Performance: An Empirical Examination [J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,2007,19(4): 527-558.
[174]Giovanna P. Enhancing the Innovation Performance of Firm by Balancing Cohesiveness and Bridging Ties[J]. Long Range Planning,2008,41(1):395-419.
[175]Gobeli D H, Brown W B. Technological Innovation Strategies[J]. Engineering Management Journal,1994(6):17-24.
[176]Gnyawali D R, Madhavan R. Cooperative Networks and Competitive Dynamics:A Structural Embededness Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Review,2001,26(3):431-445.
[177]Granovetter M S. Economic Action and Social Structure:The Problem of Embeddedness [J]. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3):481-510.
[178]Grossman G M, Helpman E. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy[M]. Cambridge: The MIT Press,1991.
[179]Griliches Z, Mairesse J. Comparing Productivity Growth:An Exploration of French and U.S. Industrial and Firm Data [J]. European Economic Review,1983 (21):45-81.
[180]Griliches Z. R&D and the Productivity Slowdown[J]. The American Economic Review, 1980,70 (2):343-348.
[181]Griliches Z. Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth[J]. Bell Journal of Economics,1979(10):92-116.
[182]Guellec D, Pottelsberghe B V. The Impact of Public R&D Expenditure on Business R&D[J]. Economics of Innovation and New Technology.2003(3):225-243.
[183]Guthrie J P. High-Involvement Work Practices, Turnover, and Productivity:Evidence from New Zealand [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44(1):180-190.
[184]Gylfason T. Principles of Economic Growth[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999.
[185]Hall B, Van Reenen J. How Effective are Fiscal Incentives for R&D? A Review of the Evidence [J]. Research Policy.2000(29):449-469.
[186]Hall B.H. R&D Tax Policy during the Eighties:Success of Failure? [J]. Tax Policy and the Economy.1993(7):1-36.
[187]Hansen M T. The Search-transfer Problem:The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge Across Organization Subunits [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44(1):82-112.
[188]Hagedoorn J, Cloodt M. Measuring Innovation Performance:Is There an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators? [J]. Research Policy,2003(32):1365-1379.
[189]Hausman J A, Hall B H, Griliches Z. Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents R&D Relationship[R]. New York:NBER Technical Working Paper NO.17.1984.
[190]Hinloopen J. More on Subsidizing Cooperative and Non-cooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers[J]. Journal of Economics.2000,72(3):295-308.
[191]Hitt M, Bierman L, Shimizu K, Kochhar R. Direct and Moderating Effects of Human Capital on Strategy and Performance in Professional Service Firms:A Resource Based Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44 (1):13-28.
[192]Hsu I C. Knowledge Sharing Practices as a Facilitating Factor for Improving Organizational Performance through Human Capital:A Preliminary Test [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2008,35(3):1316-1326.
[193]Jefferson G H, Bai Huamao, Guan Xiaojing, Yu Xiaoyun. R&D Performance in Chinese Industry[J]. Economic of Innovation and New Technology,2006,15 (4-5):345-366.
[194]Jian-Cheng Guan, Yam R C M, Tang E P Y, Lau A K W. Innovation Strategy and Performance during Economic Transition:Evidences in Beijing, China [J]. Research Policy, 2009(38):802-812.
[195]Jorgenson D W. Captial Theory and Investment Behavior[J]. The American Economic Review,1963,53(2):247-259.
[196]Joshi A W, Sharma S. Customer Knowledge Development:Antecedents and Impact on New Product Performance [J]. Journal of Marketing,2004,68(1):47-59.
[197]Jones C I, Williams J C. Measuring the Social Return to R&D[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1119-1135.
[198]JR Hines Jr. On the Sensitivity of R&D to Delicate Tax Changes:The Behavior of US Multinationals in the 1980s [J]. Studies in International Taxation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.1993:149-194.
[199]Kamien M L, Schwarts N L. Self-Financing of an R&D Project[J]. The American Economic Review,1978,68 (3):252-261.
[200]Kirner E, Kinkel S, Jaeger A. Innovation Paths and the Innovation Performance of Low-technology Firms:An Empirical Analysis of German Industry [J]. Research Policy,2009(38): 447-458.
[201]Kilkenny M, Nalbarte L, Besser T. Reciprocated Community Support and Small Town-Small Business Success [J]. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development,1999,11 (3): 231-246.
[202]Klassen K J, Pittman J A, Reed M P. Cross-national Comparison of R&D Expenditure Decisions:Tax Incentives and Financial Constraints [J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 2004,21 (3):639-680.
[203]Klevorick A K. On the Sources and Significance of Interindustry Differences in Technological Opportunities [J]. Research Policy,1995(24):185-205
[204]Kostopoulos K, Papalexandris A, Papachroni M, Ioannou G. Absorptive Capacity, Innovation, and Financial Performance[J]. Journal of Business Research,2011(64):1335-1343.
[205]Kraft K. Are Product and Process Innovations Independent of Each Other? [J]. Applied Economics,1990,22(8):1029-1038.
[206]Lado A A, Wilson M C. Human Resource Systems and Sustained Competitive Advantage:A Competence-Based Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Review,1994,19 (4):699-727.
[207]Lau C, Ngo H. The HR System, Organizational Culture, and Product Innovation [J]. International Business Review,2004,13 (6):685-703.
[208]Leede J, de Looise J C, Alders B C M. Innovation, Improvement and Operations:an Exploration of the Management of Alignment [J]. International Journal of Technology Management,2002(23):353-368.
[209]Lokshin B, Mohnen P. How effective are Level-based R&D Tax Credits? Evidence from the Netherlands [J]. Applied Economics,2012,44 (12):1527-1538.
[210]Los B, Verspagen B. R&D Spillovers and Productivity:Evidence from U.S. Manufacturing Microdata [J]. Empirical Economics,2000,25(1):127-148.
[211]Lucas R E. On the Mechanics of Economic Development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,22 (1):3-42.
[212]Mamuneas T, Nadiri M. Public R&D Policies and Cost Behavior of the US manufacturing industries [J]. Journal of Public Economics.1996(63):57-81.
[213]Matthew S K. Learning by Association? Interorganizational Networks and Adaptation to Environmental Chance[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1999,41(6):621-643.
[214]Mansfield E, Rapoport J, Romeo A, Wagner S, Beardsley G. Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovation [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,91(2):221-240.
[215]Mansfield E. The R&D Tax Credit and Other Technology Policy Issues [J]. AEA Papers and Proceedings.1986(76):190-194.
[216]Mansfield E, Switzer L. The Effects of R&D Tax Credits and Allowances in Canada[J]. Research Policy.1985(14):97-107.
[217]Maskell P. Social Capital Innovation and Competitiveness[A]. Oxford. Oxford University Press,1999(7).
[218]McCutchen W.M. Jr. Estimating the Impact of the R&D Tax Credit on Strategic Groups in the Pharmaceutical Industry[J]. Research Policy.1993(22):337-351.
[219]Moser M R, Morrissey B. Achievement Recognition in a Research and Development Unit[J]. Engineering Management International,1984,3 (1):49-55.
[220]Nelson R R. The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1959,67(2):297-306.
[221]Nelson R R. Government and Technical Progress:A Cross-industry Analysis[M]. New York: Pergamon Press,1982:454.
[222]Nunnally J C. Psychometric Theory[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill,1978.
[223]OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development:Trends and Issues [R]. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers.2003
[224]Owen-Smith J, Powell W W. Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits:The Effects of Spillovers in the Biotechnology Community [J]. Organization Science,2004,15(1):5-21.
[225]Olson E M, Walker O C, Rucker R W. Organizing for Effective New Product Development: The Moderating Role of Product Innovativeness [J]. Journal of Marketing,1995,59 (1):48-62.
[226]Pakes A, Griliches Z. Patents and R&D at the Firm Level:A First Report [J]. Economics Letters,1980,5(4):377-381.
[227]Phelps C C.A Longitudinal Study of the Influence of Alliance Network Structure and Composition on Firm Exploratory Innovation[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2010,53(4): 890-913.
[228]Pissarides F. Is Lack of Funds the Main Obstacle to Growth? EBRD's Experience with Small-and Medium-Sized Businesses in Central and Eastern Europe [J]. Journal of Business Venturing,1999,14 (5-6):519-539.
[229]Powell W W, Koput K, Smith D L. Inter-organizational Collaborations and the Locus of Innovation:Networks of Learning in Biotechnology [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41):116-145.
[230]Prajogo D I, Ahmed P K. Relationships between Innovation Stimulus, Innovation Capacity, and Innovation Performance [J]. R&D Management,2006,36(5):499-515.
[231]Prajogo D I, Sohal A S. The Integration of TQM and Technology/R&D Management in Determining Quality and Innovation Performance [J]. The International Journal of Management Science,2006(34):296-312.
[232]Prajogo D I, Power D J, Sohal A S. The Role of Trading Partner Relationships in Determining Innovation Performance:An Empirical Examination [J]. European Journal of Innovation Management,2004,7(3):178-186.
[233]Prajogo D I, Power D J, Sohal A S. The Role of Trading Partner Relationship in Determining Innovation Performance:An Empirical Examination [J]. European Journal of Innovation Management,2004,7 (3):178-186.
[234]Romer P M. Endogenous Technological Change[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1990, 98(5):71-102.
[235]Rosenberg N. Perspectives on Technology[M]. London:Cambridge University Press,1976: 58-125.
[236]Rothwell R. Towards the Fifth-generation Innovation Process[J]. International Marketing Review,1994,11 (1):7-31.
[237]Richard Yu Yuan Hung, Bella Ya-Huui Lien, Baiyin Yang, Chi-Min Wu, Yu-Ming Kuo. Impact of TQM and Organizational Learning on Innovation Performance in the High-tech Industry[J]. International Business Review,2011(20):213-225.
[238]Ritter T, Gemunden H G. The Impact of a Company's Business Strategy on its Technological Competence, Network Competence and Innovation Success[J]. Journal of Business Research,2004(57):548-556.
[239]Rong-Tsu Wang, Chieh-Peng Lin. Understanding Innovation Performance and Its Antecedents:A Socio-cognitive Model [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2012(29):210-225.
[240]Samuelson P A. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure [J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics,1954,36(4):387-389.
[241]Saul Lach. Do R&D Subsidies Stimulate or Displace Private R&D? Evidence from Israel [J]. NBER Working Paper NO.7943.2000.
[242]Scherer F M. Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented lnnovation[J]. The American Economic Review,1965(5):1097-1125.
[243]Schilling M A, Phelps C C. lnterfirm Collaboration Networks:The Impact of Large Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation [J]. Management Science,2007,53(7):1113-1126.
[244]Schneider L, Gunther J, Brandenburg B. Innovation and Skills from A Sectoral Perspective: A Linked Employer-employee Analysis [J]. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2010, 19(2):185-202.
[245]Spence M. Cost Reduction, Competition and Industry Performance [J]. Econometrica.1984, 52(1):101-121.
[246]Spell C S. Organizational Technologies and Human Resource Management [A]. Human Relations,2001(54):193-213.
[247]Tadahisa Koga. Firm Size and R&D Tax Incentives [J]. Technovation.2003(23):643-648.
[248]Tsai W, Ghoshal S. Social Capital and Value Creation:The Role of Intrafirm networks [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4):464-476.
[249]Warda J. Tax Treatment of Business Investments in Intellectual Assets:An International Comparison [R]. STI Working Paper,2006(4).
[250]Warda J. Measuring the Value of R&D Tax Provisions [J]. OECD Fiscal Measures to Promote R&D and Innovation. OECD/GD.1996(96):9-22.
[251]William B, Richard S. Identifying Generalizable Effects of Strategic Actions on Firm Performance:The Case of Demand-side Returns to R&D Spending[J]. Marketing Science, 1995,14(3):222-236.
[252]Winne S D, Sels L. Interrelationships between Human Capital, HRM and Innovation in Belgian Start-ups Aiming at An Innovation Strategy[J]. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,2010,21(11):1863-1883.
[253]Wright P, McMahan G, McWilliams A. Human Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage:A Resource-Based Perspective [J]. International Journal of Human Resource Management,1994,5(2):301-326.
[254]Yamin S, Mavondo F, Gunasekaran A, Sarros J. A Study of Competitive Strategy, Organizational Innovation and Organizational Performance among Australian Manufacturing Companies[J]. International Journal of Production Economics,1997(52):161-172.
[255]Yli-Renko H, Autio E, Sapienza H J. Social Capital, Knowledge Acquisition, and Knowledge Exploitation in Young Technology-based firms[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22):587-613.
[256]Yuan-Chieh Chang, Ming-Huei Chen. Comparing Approaches to System of Innovation:The Knowledge Perspective [J]. Technology in Society,2004(26):17-37.
[257]Zaheer M. Bridging Ties:A Source of Firm Heterogeneity in Competitive Capabilities[J]. Stragic Management Journal,1999,20(12):1133-1156.
5 数据来源Warda J. Tax Treatment of Business Investments in Intellectual Assets:An International Comparison [R]. STI Working Paper,2006(4).
6 2001-2002年和1999-2000年的数据来源OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development:Trends and Issues [R].STI Working Papers.2003
[1]安同良,施浩,Ludovico Alcorta.中国制造业企业R&D行为模式的观测与实证——基于江苏省制造业企业问卷调查的实证分析[J].经济研究.2006(6)：21-56.
[2]安沃·沙赫.促进投资与创新的财政激励[M].北京：经济科学出版社.2000：286-289.
[3]包健.高新技术产业发展的税收优惠政策分析[J].科学管理研究.2008(5)：106-108.
[4]宝贡敏,杨静.企业技术管理在技术创新中的角色——基于浙江省企业的研究[J].科学学研究.2004(5)：546-551.
[5]曹燕萍,刘雅利.论企业科技创新中“试错”的税收宽容[J].财经理论与实践.2009(1)：74-78.
[6]陈海波.企业R&D投入绩效影响因素的实证分析——基于江苏省企业创新调查数据[J].科技进步与对策.2011(11)：63-66.
[7]陈艳珍.我国现行创新激励税收政策的问题分析及政策建议[J].经济问题.2008(9)：98-100.
[8]陈柳钦,杨艺.促进我国高新技术产业发展的税收政策研究[J].经济纵横.2006(2)：14-17.
[9]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放式创新促进创新绩效的机理研究[J].科研管理.2009(4)：1-9.
[10]陈劲,陈钰芬.企业技术创新绩效评价指标体系研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2006(3)：86-91.
[11]陈勇星,秦秋英,李由胜.中小企业技术创新模式选择策略[J].统计与决策.2008(8)：175-177.
[12]陈伟,张旭梅.供应链伙伴特性、知识交易与创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].科研管理.2011(11)：7-17.
[13]陈钰芬,陈劲.开放度对企业技术创新绩效的影响[J].科学学研究.2008(2)：419-426.
[14]崔宁宁,高宇.吸收能力对创新模式选择影响的研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(11)：111-117.
[15]初大智,杨硕,崔世娟.技术合作对创新绩效的影响研究——以广东省制造业为例[J].中国软科学.2011(8)：155-164.
[16]戴晨,刘怡.税收优惠与财政补贴对企业R&D影响的比较分析[J].经济科学.2008(3)：58-71.
[17]戴勇,朱桂龙,肖丁丁.内部社会资本、知识流动与创新——基于省级技术中心企业的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2011(7)：1046-1055.
[18]丁宝军,朱桂龙.基于知识结构的R&D投入与技术创新绩效关系的实证分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2008(9)：29-34.
[19]范柏乃.而向自主创新的财税激励政策研究[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
[20]樊钱涛.知识源、知识获取方式与产业创新绩效研究——以中国高技术产业为例[J].科研管理.2011(5)：29-35.
[21]方刚.网络能力结构及对企业创新绩效作用机制研究[J].科学学研究.2011(3)：461-470.
[22]冯文娜.高新技术企业研发投入与创新产出的关系研究——基于山东省高新技术企业的实证[J].经济问题.2010(9)：74-78.
[23]高楠.大中型企业R&D投入与创新绩效灰色关联度分析——基于河北省和全国的比较[J].现代商贸工业.2010(6)：1-2.
[24]高建,汪剑飞,魏平.企业技术创新绩效指标：现状、问题和新概念模型[J].科研管理.2004(S 1)：14-22.
[25]高山行,谢言,王玉玺.企业R&D能力、外部环境不确定性对合作创新模式选择的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2009(6)：932-940.
[26]官建成,刘顺忠.区域创新机构对创新绩效影响的研究[J].科学学研究.2003(2)：210-214.
[27]郭玉清,姜磊,李永宁.中国财政创新激励政策的增长绩效分析[J].当代经济科学.2009(3)：1-124.
[28]何悦,朱桂龙,戴勇.企业创新绩效影响因素的系统动力学研究[J].软科学.2010(7)：19-23.
[29]贺明,夏恩君,刘伊雯.中关村科技园区高新技术企业技术创新模式研究[J].科技进步与对策.2010(3)：9-11.
[30]侯作前.全球中小企业税收优惠制度改革及借鉴[J].财贸研究.2009(6)：70-74.
[31]黄萃,苏竣,施丽萍,程啸天.中国高新技术产业税收优惠政策文本量化研究[J].科研管理.2011(10)：46-96.
[32]黄国斌,田志康.促进科技创新的税收激励政策——英美等国的主要经验及其启示[J].经济管理.2008(Z2)：151-156.
[33]黄冠豪,张松.促进我国企业创新能力提高的税收激励政策研究[J].当代经济研究.2007(11)：62-65.
[34]黄永明,何伟.技术创新的税收激励：理论与实践[J].财政研究.2006(10)：47-49.
[35]胡卫,熊鸿军.R&D税收刺激——原理、评估方法与政策含义[J].管理科学.2005(1)：84-91.
[36]胡恩华.企业技术创新绩效的综合模糊评价及其应用[J].经济管理.2002(10)：54-57.
[37]蒋建军,齐建国.激励企业R&D支出的税收政策效应研究[J].中国软科学.2007(8)：65-70.
[38]江静.公共政策对企业创新支持的绩效——基于直接补贴与税收优惠的比较分析[J].科研管理.2011(4)：1-50.
[39]焦少飞,张炜,杨选良.技术体制、研发努力与创新绩效：来自中国制造业的证据[J].中国软科学.2010(5)：37-44.
[40]经济合作与发展组织,欧盟统计署.奥斯陆手册：创新数据的采集和解释指南[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社.2011：37-38.
[41]库姆斯,萨维奥蒂,沃尔什.经济学与技术进步[M].北京：商务印书馆,1989.
[42]匡小平,肖建华.我国自主创新能力培育的税收优惠政策整合——基于高新技术企业税收优惠的分析[J].财贸经济.2007(13)：51-55.
[43]李丽青,师萍,曾观群.中外激励企业R&D投入的税收优惠政策比较及思考[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2005(10)：22-25.
[44]李丽青.我国现行R&D税收优惠政策的有效性研究[J].中国软科学.2007(7)：115-120.
[45]李文.创新税收激励的国际比较与借鉴[J].税务研究.2007(4)：54-59.
[46]李林木.从国际比较看我国激励创新的税收政策选择[J].税务研究.2007(4)：50-53.
[47]李涛,黄晓蓓,王超.企业科研投入与经营绩效的实证研究——信息业与制造业上市公司的比较[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2008(7)：170-174.
[48]李新功.基于社会资本理论的企业技术创新模式研究[J].科学管理研究.2006(5)：9-12.
[49]李贞,杨洪涛.吸收能力、关系学习及知识整合对企业创新绩效的影响研究——来自科技型中小企业的实证研究[J].科研管理.2012(1)：79-89.
[50]李平.技术扩散理论及实证研究[M].山西：山西经济出版社.1999：33-42.
[51]李丽青.税收激励对企业R&D投资的影响[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2007(4)：29-32.
[52]林颖.促进科技创新的税收政策研究[J].税务研究.2007(1)：14-16.
[53]梁云凤.促进科技发展的税收对策[J].中央财经大学学报.2005(3)：6-9.
[54]梁莱歆,马如飞,田元飞.科技经费投入结构与企业技术创新——基于我国大中型工业企业的实证研究[J].科学管理研究.2009(4)：104-107.
[55]林春培,张振刚,田帅.基于企业技术能力和技术创新模式相互匹配的引进消化吸收再创新[J].中国科技论坛.2009(9)：47-51.
[56]柳剑平,郑绪涛,喻美辞.税收、补贴与R&D溢出效应分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2005(12)：81-90.
[57]柳光强,田文宠.完善促进战略性新兴产业发展的税收政策设想——从区域税收优惠到产业优惠[J].中央财经大学学报.2012(3)：1-5.
[58]刘溶沧.促进科技成果转化的税收政策探讨[J].中国工业经济.2000(6)：11-14.
[59]刘顺忠,官建成.区域创新系统创新绩效的评价[J].中国管理科学.2002(1)：76-79.
[60]刘满凤.我国各地区大中型工业企业技术创新绩效比较[J].统计与决策.2006(20)：74-76.
[61]刘和东.中国工业企业的创新绩效及影响因素研究——基于DEA-Tobit两步法的实证分析[J].山西财经大学学报.2010(3)：68-74.
[62]刘衡,李垣,李西垚,肖婷.关系资本、组织间沟通和创新绩效的关系研究[J].科学学研究.2010(12)：1912-1919.
[63]刘初旺.我国R&D税收激励程度的国际比较研究——基于B-index模型[J].财经论丛.2012(1)：40-47.
[64]龙静,黄勋敬,余志杨.政府支持行为对中小企业创新绩效的影响——服务性中介机构的作用[J].科学学研究.2012(5)：783-792.
[65]娄贺统.企业技术创新的税收激励效应研究[M].上海：立信会计出版社.2010：49.
[66]陆国庆.中国中小板上市公司产业创新的绩效研究[J].经济研究.2011(2)：138-148.
[67]罗亚非,李敦响.我国中部6省和京、沪、粤区域技术创新绩效比较研究[J].科技进步与对策.2006(1)：18-21.
[68]罗亚非,工海峰,范小阳.研发创新绩效评价的国际比较研究[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2010(3)：28-41.
[69]罗赳赳,田新民,康力.企业自主创新模式研究与选择[J].科技进步与对策.2007(5)：104-107.
[70]罗默.现代经济周期理论[M].北京：商务印书馆,1997.
[71]卢馨.企业人力资本、R&D与自主创新——基于高新技术上市企业的经验证据[J].暨南学报(哲学社会科学版).2013(1)：104-117.
[72]马伟红.税收激励与政府资助对企业R&D投入影响的实证研究——基于上市高新技术企业的面板数据[J].科技进步与对策.2011(17)：111-114.
[73]马海涛,姜爱华.促进科技成果转化与产业化的税收支持方式研究[J].税务研究.2010(8)：3-7.
[74]聂颖,杨志安.企业研发投资财税激励检验的实证分析[J].财经问题研究.2011(8)：103-108.
[75]彭灿,杨玲.技术能力、创新战略与创新绩效的关系研究[J].科研管理.2009(2)：26-32.
[76]彭红霞,达庆利.跨国公司人力资源系统、企业文化与创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].国际贸易问题.2007(4)：100-105.
[77]任胜刚.企业网络能力结构的测评及其对企业创新绩效的影响机制研究[J].南开管理评论.2010(1)：69-80.
[78]钱锡红,徐万里,杨永福.企业网络位置、间接联系与创新绩效[J].中国工业经济.2010(2)：78-88.
[79]任胜刚,宋迎春,王龙伟,曹裕.基于企业内外部网络视角的创新绩效多因素影响模型与实证研究[J].中国工业经济.2010(4)：100-109.
[80]沈肇章,魏朗.影响高新技术企业税收优惠政策实施效果的因素分析——以东莞市为例[J].财贸经济.2009(5)：57-60.
[81]师萍,许治,张炳南.我国R&D投入绩效的实证研究[J].中国软科学.2007(6)：125-130.
[82]舒志彪,于君博,于永达.企业规模与企业创新产出关系的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2007(2)：21-26.
[83]宋河发,穆荣平,任中保.技术开发费150%税前加计扣除政策落实问题分析与对策研究[J].科学学研究.2009(12)：1822-1828.
[84]孙玮,成力为,刘栋.不同主体R&D投入与技术创新绩效变动差异——基于中国高技术产业的实证研究[J].山西财经大学学报.2009(10)：64-70.
[85]陶锋.吸收能力、价值链类型与创新绩效——基于国际代工联盟知识溢出的视角[J].中国工业经济.2011(1)：140-150.
[86]田盈,潘晓琳.基于加权主成分分析的企业技术创新绩效评价模型研究[J].科技进步与对策.2008(3)：130-133.
[87]王保进.窗口版SPSS与行为科学研究[M].台北：心理出版社,2002.
[88]干峰丽,蒋保林OECD国家R&D税收激励政策研究与经验借鉴[J].中国科技论坛.2005(4)：136-139.
[89]王俊.我国政府R&D税收优惠强度的测算及影响效应检验[J].科研管理.2011(9)：157-]64.
[90]王金营.人力资本与经济增长理论与实证[M].北京：中国财政经济出版社.2001：55.
[91]王玺,姜朋.鼓励自主创新的税收优惠政策探析[J].税务研究.2010(8)：12-15.
[92]工海花,谢富纪.开放式创新模式下组织间知识转移、环境动荡性对企业创新绩效的影响研究[J].科学管理研究.2012(3)：70-73.
[93]工青云,饶扬德.企业技术创新绩效的层次灰色综合评判模型[J].数量经济技术经济研究.2004(5)：55-62.
[94]王然,邓伟根.研发投入来源、技术溢出渠道与自主创新绩效——基于高技术行业面板数据的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2011(10)：6-9.
[95]王生辉.企业非突破性自主创新模式研究[J].科学管理研究.2007(3)：34-37.
[96]江碧瀛,杜跃平.企业技术创新模式的路径选择与实证分析[J].科技进步与对策.2006(9)：40-42.
[97]王红霞,高山行.基于资源利用的企业R&D投入与创新产出关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2009(2)：567-572.
[98]王玉荣,杨震宁,李军.竞争环境和技术战略对制造业创新绩效的影响[J].科研管理.2011(7)：25-44.
[99]吴秀波.税收激励对R&D投资的影响：实证分析与政策工具选拔[J].研究与发展管理.2003(1)：36-41.
[100]吴延兵,刘霞辉.人力资本与研发行为——基于民营企业调研数据的分析[J].经济学(季刊).2009(4)：1567-1590.
[101]吴明隆.问卷统计分析实务——SPSS操作与应用[M].重庆：重庆大学出版社,2010.
[102]向刚,熊觅,李兴宽,等.创新型企业持续创新绩效评价研究[J].科技进步与对策.2011(8)：119-123.
[103]向坚,刘洪伟.技术创新绩效评价研究综述[J].科技进步与对策.2011(6)：155-160.
[104]肖鹏,黎一璇.所得税税收减免与企业研发支出关系的协整分析——基于全国54个国家级高新区的实证研究[J].中央财经大学学报.2011(8)：13-53.
[105]肖鹏,吴永红.企业研发投入的税收优惠政策差异：国际经验与启示[J].改革.2009(4)：91-97.
[106]谢科范,董芹芹,陈云.基于资源集成的自主创新模式辨析[J].科学学研究.2007(S1)：110-113.
[107]熊维勤.税收和补贴对R&D效率和规模的影响[J].科学学研究.2011(5)：698-706.
[108]徐伟民.科技政策与高新技术企业的R&D投入决策——来自上海的微观实证分析[J].上海经济研究.2009(5)：55-64.
[109]徐亮,张宗益,龙勇,周旭.竞合战略与技术创新绩效的实证研究[J].科研管理.2009(1)：87-96.
[110]徐博.促进我国自主科技创新的财税政策研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社.2010：63-64.
[111]许洁.促进科技型中小企业发展的财税政策分析[J].中国科技论坛.2004(1).
[112]薛镭,杨艳,朱恒源.战略导向对我国企业产品创新绩效的影响——一个高科技行业-非高科技行业企业的比较[J].科研管理.2011(12)：1-8.
[113]杨勇,达庆利.企业技术创新绩效与其规模、R&D投资、人力资本投资之间的关系——基于面板数据的实证研究[J].科技进步与对策.2007(11)：128-131.
[114]杨建君,梅晓芳,何颖.控制方式、创新承诺及创新模式选择关系研究[J].科学学研究.2008(S1)：202-208.
[115]杨建君,聂菁.寡头垄断企业技术创新模式选择——创新风险与技术类型的影响分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(11)：94-99.
[116]尹建海,杨建华.基于加强型平衡记分法的企业技术创新绩效评价指标体系研究[J].科研管理.2008(1)：1-7.
[117]袁旭梅,刘文智,孙微微.我国区域创新系统绩效研究进展[J].科学管理研究.2011(4)：37-41.
[118]于成永,施建军.研发模式选择及其对创新绩效的影响——一个研究综述[J].经济管理.2006(19)：6-11.
[119]曾德明,文金艳,禹献云.技术创新网络结构与创新类型配适对企业创新绩效的影响[J].软科学.2012(5)：1-9.
[120]詹·布坎南.民主财政论[M].北京：商务印书馆.1993：27.
[121]张明喜.促进企业自主创新的税收政策研究[J].中国科技论坛.2009(12)：28-47.
[122]张志超,刘喆,丁宏.关于调整、优化税制结构的理论思考[J].经济学动态.2008(7)：33-39.
[123]张鸿.促进高新技术产业发展的科技税收优惠政策研究[J].科学管理研究.2001(4)：62-68.
[124]张明喜.促进企业自主创新的税收政策研究[J].中国科技论坛.2009(12)：28-31.
[125]张涛,马亚红.中外R&D所得税税收激励政策比较与思考[J].经济管理.2008(19-20)：157-160.
[126]张方华.企业社会资本与技术创新绩效：概念模型与实证分析[J].研究与发展管理.2006(3)：47-53.
[127]张方华.网络嵌入影响企业创新绩效的概念模型与实证分析[J].中国工业经济.2010(4)：110-119.
[128]张方华.资源获取与技术创新绩效关系的实证研究[J].科学学研究.2006(4)：635-640.
[129]支燕.创新能力、技术转化与创新绩效——来自我国电子信息业上市公司的实证[J].科学学与科学技术管理.2009(3)：96-99.
[130]周永红.开放型创新模式的衍生性制度要素及约束条件[J].科技进步与对策.2010(8)：51-54.
[131]周学军,易蓉,高燕.企业技术创新的关键成功因素分析[J].统计与决策.2008(22)：172-173.
[132]朱学冬,陈雅兰.创新型企业创新绩效评价研究——以福建省为例[J].中国科技论坛.2010(9)：77-82.
[133]朱平芳,徐伟民.政府的科技激励政策对大中型工业企业R&D投入及其专利产出的影响——上海市的实证研究[J].经济研究.2003(6)：45-94.
[134]朱云欢,张明喜.我国财政补贴对企业研发影响的经验分析[J].经济经纬.2010(5)：77-81.
[135]朱琪,李鸿玲.技术创新型人力资本对工业产业竞争力作用研究：以广东省为例[J].当代财经.2007(7)：75-80.
[136]朱瑜,王雁飞,蓝海林.企业文化、智力资本与组织绩效关系研究[J].科学学研究.2007(5)：952-958.
[137]Akgun A E, Keskin H, Byrne J. Organizational Emotional Capability, Product and Process Innovation, and Firm Performance:An Empirical Analysis [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,2009(26):103-130.
[138]Arrow K J. Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1962:609-626.
[139]Amabile T M, Conti R, Coon H, Lazenby J, Herron M. Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity[J]. The Academy of Management Journal,1996,39(5):1154-1184.
[140]Arthur J B. Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1994,37 (3):670-687.
[141]Asmussen E, Berriot C. Le credit d-impot recherche, coutet effet incitatif [J]. Ministere de l'Economie et des Finances. Paris, France.1993.
[142]Baily M.N, Lawrence R.Z. Tax Incentives for R&D:What Do the Data Tell Us? Study commissioned by the Council on Research and Technology. Washington DC.1992.
[143]Baker W E, Sinkula J M. The Synergistic Effect of Market Orientation and Learning Orientation on Organizational Performance [J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1999,27(4):411-427.
[144]Baumol W J. The Free-Market Innovation Machine:Analyzing the Growth Miracle of Capitalism [M]. Princeton:Princeton University Press,2002.
[145]Beenstock M. Taxation and Incentives in the UK[J]. Lloyds Bank Review,1979(134):1-15.
[146]Berman S A, Down J, Hill C W L. Tacit Knowledge as A Source of Competitive Advantage in the Notional Basketball Association[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2002,45 (1):13-31.
[147]Bernstein J.I. The Effect of Direct and Indirect Tax Incentives on Canadian Industrial R&D Expenditures[J]. Canadian Public Policy.1986 XII:438-448.
[148]Berger P. Explicit and Implicit Effects of the R&D Tax Credit [J]. Journal of Accounting Research.1993(31):131-171.
[149]Black S E, Lynch L M. Human-Capital Investments and Productivity[J]. American Economic Review,1996,86 (2):263-267.
[150]Bloom N, Griffith R, Van Reenen J. Do R&D Tax Credits Work? Evidence from a Panel of Countries 1979-1997[J]. Journal of Public Economics.2002(85):1-31.
[151]Brouwer E, Kleinknecht A. Innovative Output, and A Firm's Propensity to Patent:An Exploration of CSI Micro Data [J]. Research Policy,1999,28 (6):615-624.
[152]Burts R S. The Network Structure of Social Capital[J]. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2000(22):345-423.
[153]Chan L K C, Lakonishok J, Sougiannis T. The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures[J]. The Journal of Finance,2001,56 (6):2431-2456.
[154]Chengqi Wang, Kafouros M I. What Factors Determine Innovation Performance in Emerging Economies? Evidence from China[J]. International Business Review,2009(18): 606-616.
[155]Churchill G A. A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs [J]. Journal of Marketing Research,1979,16(1):64-73.
[156]Chiesa V, Coughlan P, Voss C A. Development of a Technical Innovation Audit[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management,1996,13(2):105-136.
[157]Cloodt M, Hagedoorn J, Kranenburg H V. Mergers and Acquisitions:Their Effect on the Innovative Performance of Companies in High-tech Industries [J]. Research Policy,2006(35): 642-654.
[158]Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive Capacity:A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1):128-152.
[159]Cohen W M, Klepper S. A Reprise of Size and R&D[J]. The Economic Journal,1996(106): 925-951.
[160]Colazo J A. Collaboration Structure and Performance in New Software Development: Findings from the Study of Open Source Projects [J]. International Journal of Innovation Management,2010,14(5):735-758.
[161]Comanor W S. Market Structure, Product Differentiation, and Industrial Research [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1967,81 (4):639-657.
[162]Chih-Hai Yang, Chia-Hui Huang, Tong Chieh-Tse Hou. Tax Incentives and R&D Activity: Firm-Level Evidence from Taiwan [J]. Research Policy,2012,41 (9):1578-1588.
[163]Chung-Jen Chen, Jing-Wen Huang. Strategic Human Resource Practices and Innovation Performance:The mediating Role of Knowledge Management Capacity [J]. Journal of Business Research,2009(62):104-114.
[164]Czarnitzki D, Hanel P, Rosa J M. Evaluating the Impact of R&D Tax Credits on Innovation: A Microeconometric Study on Canadian Firms [J]. Research Policy,2011,40 (2):217-229.
[165]Dagenais M, Mohnen P, Thierrien P. Do Canadian Firms Respond to Fiscal Incentives to Research and Development? [J]. Tilburg University mimeo.1997.
[166]Dess G, Origer N K. Environment Structure and Consensus in Strategy Formulation:A Conceptual Integration [J]. Academy of Management Review,1987,12(2):313-330.
[167]D Jimenez-Jimenez, R Sanz-Valle. Innovation, Organizational Learning, and Performance [J]. Journal of Business Research,2011(64):408-417.
[168]Eberhart A C, Maxwell W F, Siddique A R. An Examination of Long-term Abnormal Stock Returns and Operating Performance Following R&D Increases[J]. Journal of Finance,2004(59): 623-650.
[169]Eckstein O. Tax Policy and Core Inflation:A Study Prepared for the Use of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States [M]. Washington:US Government Printing Office,1980.
[170]European Commission, Innovation Directory. Corporation Tax and Innovation:Issues at Stake and Review of European Union Experience in the Nineteen's [R]. European Commission, 2002(38).
[171]Farrell M J. The Measurement of Productive Efficiency[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,1957,120(3):253-290.
[172]Frascati M. Main Definitions and Conventions for the Measurement of Research and Experimental Development (R&D)[R]. OECD/GD.1994(84):256-260.
[173]Garcia-Morales V J, Ruiz-Moreno A, Llorens-Montes F J. Effects of Technology Absorptive Capacity and Technology Proactivity on Organizational Learning, Innovation and Performance: An Empirical Examination [J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,2007,19(4): 527-558.
[174]Giovanna P. Enhancing the Innovation Performance of Firm by Balancing Cohesiveness and Bridging Ties[J]. Long Range Planning,2008,41(1):395-419.
[175]Gobeli D H, Brown W B. Technological Innovation Strategies[J]. Engineering Management Journal,1994(6):17-24.
[176]Gnyawali D R, Madhavan R. Cooperative Networks and Competitive Dynamics:A Structural Embededness Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Review,2001,26(3):431-445.
[177]Granovetter M S. Economic Action and Social Structure:The Problem of Embeddedness [J]. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3):481-510.
[178]Grossman G M, Helpman E. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy[M]. Cambridge: The MIT Press,1991.
[179]Griliches Z, Mairesse J. Comparing Productivity Growth:An Exploration of French and U.S. Industrial and Firm Data [J]. European Economic Review,1983 (21):45-81.
[180]Griliches Z. R&D and the Productivity Slowdown[J]. The American Economic Review, 1980,70 (2):343-348.
[181]Griliches Z. Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth[J]. Bell Journal of Economics,1979(10):92-116.
[182]Guellec D, Pottelsberghe B V. The Impact of Public R&D Expenditure on Business R&D[J]. Economics of Innovation and New Technology.2003(3):225-243.
[183]Guthrie J P. High-Involvement Work Practices, Turnover, and Productivity:Evidence from New Zealand [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44(1):180-190.
[184]Gylfason T. Principles of Economic Growth[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1999.
[185]Hall B, Van Reenen J. How Effective are Fiscal Incentives for R&D? A Review of the Evidence [J]. Research Policy.2000(29):449-469.
[186]Hall B.H. R&D Tax Policy during the Eighties:Success of Failure? [J]. Tax Policy and the Economy.1993(7):1-36.
[187]Hansen M T. The Search-transfer Problem:The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge Across Organization Subunits [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly,1999,44(1):82-112.
[188]Hagedoorn J, Cloodt M. Measuring Innovation Performance:Is There an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators? [J]. Research Policy,2003(32):1365-1379.
[189]Hausman J A, Hall B H, Griliches Z. Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents R&D Relationship[R]. New York:NBER Technical Working Paper NO.17.1984.
[190]Hinloopen J. More on Subsidizing Cooperative and Non-cooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers[J]. Journal of Economics.2000,72(3):295-308.
[191]Hitt M, Bierman L, Shimizu K, Kochhar R. Direct and Moderating Effects of Human Capital on Strategy and Performance in Professional Service Firms:A Resource Based Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Journal,2001,44 (1):13-28.
[192]Hsu I C. Knowledge Sharing Practices as a Facilitating Factor for Improving Organizational Performance through Human Capital:A Preliminary Test [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2008,35(3):1316-1326.
[193]Jefferson G H, Bai Huamao, Guan Xiaojing, Yu Xiaoyun. R&D Performance in Chinese Industry[J]. Economic of Innovation and New Technology,2006,15 (4-5):345-366.
[194]Jian-Cheng Guan, Yam R C M, Tang E P Y, Lau A K W. Innovation Strategy and Performance during Economic Transition:Evidences in Beijing, China [J]. Research Policy, 2009(38):802-812.
[195]Jorgenson D W. Captial Theory and Investment Behavior[J]. The American Economic Review,1963,53(2):247-259.
[196]Joshi A W, Sharma S. Customer Knowledge Development:Antecedents and Impact on New Product Performance [J]. Journal of Marketing,2004,68(1):47-59.
[197]Jones C I, Williams J C. Measuring the Social Return to R&D[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1998,113(4):1119-1135.
[198]JR Hines Jr. On the Sensitivity of R&D to Delicate Tax Changes:The Behavior of US Multinationals in the 1980s [J]. Studies in International Taxation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.1993:149-194.
[199]Kamien M L, Schwarts N L. Self-Financing of an R&D Project[J]. The American Economic Review,1978,68 (3):252-261.
[200]Kirner E, Kinkel S, Jaeger A. Innovation Paths and the Innovation Performance of Low-technology Firms:An Empirical Analysis of German Industry [J]. Research Policy,2009(38): 447-458.
[201]Kilkenny M, Nalbarte L, Besser T. Reciprocated Community Support and Small Town-Small Business Success [J]. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development,1999,11 (3): 231-246.
[202]Klassen K J, Pittman J A, Reed M P. Cross-national Comparison of R&D Expenditure Decisions:Tax Incentives and Financial Constraints [J]. Contemporary Accounting Research, 2004,21 (3):639-680.
[203]Klevorick A K. On the Sources and Significance of Interindustry Differences in Technological Opportunities [J]. Research Policy,1995(24):185-205
[204]Kostopoulos K, Papalexandris A, Papachroni M, Ioannou G. Absorptive Capacity, Innovation, and Financial Performance[J]. Journal of Business Research,2011(64):1335-1343.
[205]Kraft K. Are Product and Process Innovations Independent of Each Other? [J]. Applied Economics,1990,22(8):1029-1038.
[206]Lado A A, Wilson M C. Human Resource Systems and Sustained Competitive Advantage:A Competence-Based Perspective [J]. Academy of Management Review,1994,19 (4):699-727.
[207]Lau C, Ngo H. The HR System, Organizational Culture, and Product Innovation [J]. International Business Review,2004,13 (6):685-703.
[208]Leede J, de Looise J C, Alders B C M. Innovation, Improvement and Operations:an Exploration of the Management of Alignment [J]. International Journal of Technology Management,2002(23):353-368.
[209]Lokshin B, Mohnen P. How effective are Level-based R&D Tax Credits? Evidence from the Netherlands [J]. Applied Economics,2012,44 (12):1527-1538.
[210]Los B, Verspagen B. R&D Spillovers and Productivity:Evidence from U.S. Manufacturing Microdata [J]. Empirical Economics,2000,25(1):127-148.
[211]Lucas R E. On the Mechanics of Economic Development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,22 (1):3-42.
[212]Mamuneas T, Nadiri M. Public R&D Policies and Cost Behavior of the US manufacturing industries [J]. Journal of Public Economics.1996(63):57-81.
[213]Matthew S K. Learning by Association? Interorganizational Networks and Adaptation to Environmental Chance[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1999,41(6):621-643.
[214]Mansfield E, Rapoport J, Romeo A, Wagner S, Beardsley G. Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovation [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,91(2):221-240.
[215]Mansfield E. The R&D Tax Credit and Other Technology Policy Issues [J]. AEA Papers and Proceedings.1986(76):190-194.
[216]Mansfield E, Switzer L. The Effects of R&D Tax Credits and Allowances in Canada[J]. Research Policy.1985(14):97-107.
[217]Maskell P. Social Capital Innovation and Competitiveness[A]. Oxford. Oxford University Press,1999(7).
[218]McCutchen W.M. Jr. Estimating the Impact of the R&D Tax Credit on Strategic Groups in the Pharmaceutical Industry[J]. Research Policy.1993(22):337-351.
[219]Moser M R, Morrissey B. Achievement Recognition in a Research and Development Unit[J]. Engineering Management International,1984,3 (1):49-55.
[220]Nelson R R. The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1959,67(2):297-306.
[221]Nelson R R. Government and Technical Progress:A Cross-industry Analysis[M]. New York: Pergamon Press,1982:454.
[222]Nunnally J C. Psychometric Theory[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill,1978.
[223]OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development:Trends and Issues [R]. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers.2003
[224]Owen-Smith J, Powell W W. Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits:The Effects of Spillovers in the Biotechnology Community [J]. Organization Science,2004,15(1):5-21.
[225]Olson E M, Walker O C, Rucker R W. Organizing for Effective New Product Development: The Moderating Role of Product Innovativeness [J]. Journal of Marketing,1995,59 (1):48-62.
[226]Pakes A, Griliches Z. Patents and R&D at the Firm Level:A First Report [J]. Economics Letters,1980,5(4):377-381.
[227]Phelps C C.A Longitudinal Study of the Influence of Alliance Network Structure and Composition on Firm Exploratory Innovation[J]. Academy of Management Journal,2010,53(4): 890-913.
[228]Pissarides F. Is Lack of Funds the Main Obstacle to Growth? EBRD's Experience with Small-and Medium-Sized Businesses in Central and Eastern Europe [J]. Journal of Business Venturing,1999,14 (5-6):519-539.
[229]Powell W W, Koput K, Smith D L. Inter-organizational Collaborations and the Locus of Innovation:Networks of Learning in Biotechnology [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1996(41):116-145.
[230]Prajogo D I, Ahmed P K. Relationships between Innovation Stimulus, Innovation Capacity, and Innovation Performance [J]. R&D Management,2006,36(5):499-515.
[231]Prajogo D I, Sohal A S. The Integration of TQM and Technology/R&D Management in Determining Quality and Innovation Performance [J]. The International Journal of Management Science,2006(34):296-312.
[232]Prajogo D I, Power D J, Sohal A S. The Role of Trading Partner Relationships in Determining Innovation Performance:An Empirical Examination [J]. European Journal of Innovation Management,2004,7(3):178-186.
[233]Prajogo D I, Power D J, Sohal A S. The Role of Trading Partner Relationship in Determining Innovation Performance:An Empirical Examination [J]. European Journal of Innovation Management,2004,7 (3):178-186.
[234]Romer P M. Endogenous Technological Change[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1990, 98(5):71-102.
[235]Rosenberg N. Perspectives on Technology[M]. London:Cambridge University Press,1976: 58-125.
[236]Rothwell R. Towards the Fifth-generation Innovation Process[J]. International Marketing Review,1994,11 (1):7-31.
[237]Richard Yu Yuan Hung, Bella Ya-Huui Lien, Baiyin Yang, Chi-Min Wu, Yu-Ming Kuo. Impact of TQM and Organizational Learning on Innovation Performance in the High-tech Industry[J]. International Business Review,2011(20):213-225.
[238]Ritter T, Gemunden H G. The Impact of a Company's Business Strategy on its Technological Competence, Network Competence and Innovation Success[J]. Journal of Business Research,2004(57):548-556.
[239]Rong-Tsu Wang, Chieh-Peng Lin. Understanding Innovation Performance and Its Antecedents:A Socio-cognitive Model [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2012(29):210-225.
[240]Samuelson P A. The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure [J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics,1954,36(4):387-389.
[241]Saul Lach. Do R&D Subsidies Stimulate or Displace Private R&D? Evidence from Israel [J]. NBER Working Paper NO.7943.2000.
[242]Scherer F M. Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity, and the Output of Patented lnnovation[J]. The American Economic Review,1965(5):1097-1125.
[243]Schilling M A, Phelps C C. lnterfirm Collaboration Networks:The Impact of Large Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation [J]. Management Science,2007,53(7):1113-1126.
[244]Schneider L, Gunther J, Brandenburg B. Innovation and Skills from A Sectoral Perspective: A Linked Employer-employee Analysis [J]. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2010, 19(2):185-202.
[245]Spence M. Cost Reduction, Competition and Industry Performance [J]. Econometrica.1984, 52(1):101-121.
[246]Spell C S. Organizational Technologies and Human Resource Management [A]. Human Relations,2001(54):193-213.
[247]Tadahisa Koga. Firm Size and R&D Tax Incentives [J]. Technovation.2003(23):643-648.
[248]Tsai W, Ghoshal S. Social Capital and Value Creation:The Role of Intrafirm networks [J]. Academy of Management Journal,1998,41(4):464-476.
[249]Warda J. Tax Treatment of Business Investments in Intellectual Assets:An International Comparison [R]. STI Working Paper,2006(4).
[250]Warda J. Measuring the Value of R&D Tax Provisions [J]. OECD Fiscal Measures to Promote R&D and Innovation. OECD/GD.1996(96):9-22.
[251]William B, Richard S. Identifying Generalizable Effects of Strategic Actions on Firm Performance:The Case of Demand-side Returns to R&D Spending[J]. Marketing Science, 1995,14(3):222-236.
[252]Winne S D, Sels L. Interrelationships between Human Capital, HRM and Innovation in Belgian Start-ups Aiming at An Innovation Strategy[J]. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,2010,21(11):1863-1883.
[253]Wright P, McMahan G, McWilliams A. Human Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage:A Resource-Based Perspective [J]. International Journal of Human Resource Management,1994,5(2):301-326.
[254]Yamin S, Mavondo F, Gunasekaran A, Sarros J. A Study of Competitive Strategy, Organizational Innovation and Organizational Performance among Australian Manufacturing Companies[J]. International Journal of Production Economics,1997(52):161-172.
[255]Yli-Renko H, Autio E, Sapienza H J. Social Capital, Knowledge Acquisition, and Knowledge Exploitation in Young Technology-based firms[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22):587-613.
[256]Yuan-Chieh Chang, Ming-Huei Chen. Comparing Approaches to System of Innovation:The Knowledge Perspective [J]. Technology in Society,2004(26):17-37.
[257]Zaheer M. Bridging Ties:A Source of Firm Heterogeneity in Competitive Capabilities[J]. Stragic Management Journal,1999,20(12):1133-1156.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |