The Spatial Spillover Effect in Hi-Tech Industries: Empirical Evidence from China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With ever-increasing economic globalization and rapid advancement of science and technology, developing high-tech industries have become an important way for many countries to achieve sustainable and environmentally friendly economic development. In this article, we aim to empirically test the critical factors, which can influence the spatial spillover of a country’s high-tech industries. Using data from the high-tech industries in China during the years of 2007–2016, we establish a space lag model and a space error model to examine the space fixed effect, the time fixed effect, and the space-time double mixed effect in spatial spillover in high-tech industries. We compare the results of these two spatial panel models with those from a general panel model and find that the spatial spillover effect within high-tech industries is rather significant. Moreover, we find that the spatial-time double mixed of the spatial lag model is the best fitting effect. Our empirical results also show that the research and development (R&D) investment and international trade can positively promote spatial spillover of high-tech industries among different regions. In terms of policy insights, our results imply that the government can establish a technology transfer platform to promote the spillover in high-tech industries. This can help achieve a sustainable and balanced development of high-tech industries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".