Spatial Evolution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Global R&D Patterns:An Example of the Top 2500 Global R&D Companies
Guo Weidong1,2,3, Du Debin2,3, Li Tingzhu4, Zhang Qiang2,3, Yu Yingjie2,3
1. Institute of National Security and Development Studies, Guangdong University of Finance and Economics, guangzhou 510320, China; 2. School of Geographic Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China; 3. Institute for Global Innovation and Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China; 4. Research Institute of Central Jiangsu Development, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China
Abstract：As a key engine of scientific and technological innovation,in-depth exploration of the spatial evolution characteristics of R&D activities helps identify the development trends of scientific and technological innovation and formulate targeted development strategies accordingly.This paper explores the spatial patterns,industry characteristics and impact mechanisms of global R&D patterns using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index,location quotient,kernel density analysis and fsQCA as representations of the global 2500 R&D companies.The research findings show as the follows.①Global R&D enterprises show a spatial agglomeration trend,R&D investment continues to grow,and the spatial distribution has formed a three-pole pattern of the United States,Western Europe and East Asia,and China has become the world's second largest R&D country after the United States,but compared with the United States,China's R&D investment intensity and R&D investment scale are significantly and significantly behind the United States,and the gap is tending to widen.②Global R&D activities are characterised by regional R&D specialisation and are gradually concentrated in the ICT industry.The R&D strengths of the ICT and biomedical industries in Europe and the US are more obvious,while China's R&D strengths are concentrated in the construction,energy and industrial sectors,thus creating a spatial mismatch.③Global R&D companies tend to concentrate in national central cities thus forming three types of agglomeration named as monocentric,bicentric and polycentric patterns.The spatial concentration and dispersion of political,economic,cultural and innovation factors in cities are important factors influencing the agglomeration pattern of global R&D companies.④The spatial clustering of firms in the country is the result of a combination of conditions.The number of top universities,industry structure,R&D investment intensity,scale of R&D talent,infrastructure and government efficiency are found to form three conditional groupings of highly clustered R&D firms under different grouping effects by the fsQCA method.
郭卫东, 杜德斌, 李庭竹, 张强, 于英杰. 全球研发格局的空间演变特征与组态致因——以全球研发2500强企业为例[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2025(8): 51-62.
Guo Weidong, Du Debin, Li Tingzhu, Zhang Qiang, Yu Yingjie. Spatial Evolution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Global R&D Patterns:An Example of the Top 2500 Global R&D Companies. , 2025(8): 51-62.
[1]杜德斌.全球科技创新中心:动力与模式[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2015. [2]马名杰.全球创新格局变化的新趋势及对我国的影响[J].经济纵横,2016 (7):108-112. [3]陈曦.全球科技创新格局变化与中国位势研究[J].宏观经济研究,2020 (9):77-91,102. [4]姜钧译,刘灿.全球主要国家 (地区)研发支出与科研产出的比较分析[J].中国科学基金,2020,34 (3):367-372. [5]孙中瑞,樊杰,孙勇,等.中国绿色科技创新效率空间关联网络结构特征及影响因素[J].经济地理,2022,42 (3):33-43. [6]陈衍泰,范彦成,汤临佳,等.开发利用型海外研发区位选择的影响因素:基于国家距离视角[J].科学学研究2018,36 (5):847-954. [7]LE BAS C,SIERRA C. ‘Location versus home country advantages’ in R&D activities:Some further results on multinationals' locational strategies[J].Research Policy,2002,31 (4):589-609. [8]张战仁,张润强,余智慧.跨国公司在中国研发投资的区位因素重构:决定目的城市以点带面能力的网络位置视角[J].地理科学,2022,42 (1):65-73. [9]刘振,张婷.跨国公司研发国际化前因与后效:文献综述[J].财会月刊,2021 (14):119-123. [10]吉生保,曹韵诗,马淑娟.中国上市公司海外研发投资:发展现状与影响因素[J].世界经济研究,2021 (10):103-118,136. [11]汤大军,吴宜真,黄胜生.技术外溢效应还是 “鲶鱼效应” :FDI对于发展中国家本土技术进步作用的另一种实证解读[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2013 (6):67-80. [12]张战仁,刘卫东,杜德斌.跨国公司全球研发网络投资的空间组织解构及过程[J].地理科学,2021,41 (8):1345-1353. [13]柳卸林,吴晟,朱丽.华为的海外研发活动发展及全球研发网络分析[J].科学学研究,2017,35 (6):834-841,862. [14]MARCHI V D.Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation:Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms[J].Research Policy,2012,41 (3):614-623. [15]BAUMANN J,KRITIKOS A S.The link between R&D,innovation and productivity:Are micro firms different?[J].Research Policy,2016,45 (6):1263-1274. [16]KANG K N,PARK H.Influence of government R&D support and inter-firm collaborations on innovation in Korean biotechnology SMEs[J].Technovation,2012,32 (1):68-78. [17]RAGIN,C.Fuzzy-Set Social Science[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,2000. [18]黄锐,谢朝武.中国赴东盟地区旅游安全事故风险因子的组态影响探测:基于HEVP框架的模糊集定性比较分析[J].经济地理,2021,41 (7):202-212. [19]范振杰,何丹,程雯雯.基于上市企业所有制属性的中国城市网络:时空演化与复杂性解释[J].经济地理,2023,43 (1):93-104. [20]陆玉麒.中国空间格局的规律认知与理论提炼[J].地理学报,2021,76 (12):2885-2897. [21]侯纯光,杜德斌,史文天,等.世界一流大学空间集聚对研发密集型企业空间布局的影响:以美国为例[J].地理研究,2019,38 (7):1720-1732. [22]姜帅,龙静.科技创新促进地区产业结构优化升级了吗？[J].中国矿业大学学报 (社会科学版),2022,24 (5):167-180. [23]尚勇敏,曾刚.科技创新推动区域经济发展模式转型:作用和机制[J].地理研究,2017,36 (12):2279-2290. [24]杜运周,李佳馨,刘秋辰,等.复杂动态视角下的组态理论与QCA方法:研究进展与未来方向[J].管理世界,2021,37 (3):180-197,12-13. [25]RAZMDOOST K,ALINAGHIAN L,LINDER C.New venture formation:A capability configurational approach[J].Journal of Business Research,2020,113:290-302. [26]RAGIN C,FISS C.Net effects analysis versus configurational analysis:An empirical demonstration[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press 2008. [27]杜德斌,段德忠,夏启繁.中美科技竞争力比较研究[J].世界地理研究,2019,28 (4):1-11. [28]郭卫东,杜德斌.基于模糊集定性比较分析的中国研发密集型企业格局特征与集聚路径[J].地理科学,2024,44 (4):598-609.
2025, 
