How Do Policy Drivers Translate into Integrated Development Performance? A Mixed-Methods Study on the Mechanisms Underlying the Integrated Development of Education,Science and Technology,and Talent
Bian Qingyang1, Kong Zihe2,3, Chen Lijun3,4
1. Jinhua University of Vocational Technology,Jinhua 321016,China; 2. Zhejiang Normal University,Jinhua 321004,China; 3. Zhejiang University,Hangzhou 310058,China; 4. Zhejiang Institute of Talent Development,Hangzhou 310028,China
Abstract：Following a mixed-methods research design combining qualitative exploration,theoretical development,and quantitative validation,this study first conducts grounded theory analysis based on over 300,000 words of interview data from 69 participants in Zhejiang Province to analyze Seven core factors are identified,including coordination,policy effectiveness,government intervention,resource capacity,organizational agency,collaboration risk,and service quality,and a P-R-O-E(Policy-Resource-Organization-Environment)theoretical model is developed.Subsequently,structural equation modeling is employed to empirically test the proposed model using 1,063 valid questionnaires collected from eastern,central,and western regions of China.The results show that:①coordination,policy effectiveness,resource capacity,and organizational agency have significant positive direct effects on integrated development;②resource capacity and organizational agency play dual mediating roles between two factors—coordination and policy effectiveness—and integrated development;③although government intervention does not have a significant direct effect,it indirectly promotes integrated development through resource capacity and organizational agency;and④collaboration risk and service quality exhibit complex nonlinear moderating effects.Specifically,collaboration risk generally constrains integrated development but triggers a“risk-forced improvement”mechanism under certain pathways,while service quality generally facilitates integration but demonstrates a“functional substitution”effect in some relationships.This study reveals the underlying mechanism through which policy drivers are transformed into integrated development performance,extends research on the collaborative governance of education,science and technology,and talent,and provides theoretical and practical implications for policy optimization and the transformation of governance models.
卞青阳, 孔子禾, 陈丽君. 政策推力如何转化为一体绩效？——教育科技人才一体发展影响机理的混合研究[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2026(10): 33-43.
Bian Qingyang, Kong Zihe, Chen Lijun. How Do Policy Drivers Translate into Integrated Development Performance? A Mixed-Methods Study on the Mechanisms Underlying the Integrated Development of Education,Science and Technology,and Talent. , 2026(10): 33-43.
[1] Freeman C.Technology policy and economic performance:lessons from Japan[M].London:Pinter,1987:31-54. [2] Nelson R R.National innovation systems:a comparative analysis[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1993:3-28. [3] Etzkowitz H,Leydesdorff L.The dynamics of innovation:from national systems and“Mode 2”to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations[J].Research Policy,2000,29(2):109-123. [4] Unger M,Polt W.The knowledge triangle between research,education and innovation:a conceptual discussion[J].Foresight and STI Governance,2017,11(2):10-26. [5] 李立国.从三螺旋到教育科技人才一体:高等教育与创新发展[J].清华大学教育研究,2025,46(1):30-39. [6] 车明佳,马晓强.高等教育、科技、人才一体推进的世界经验与中国证据[J].教育研究,2025,46(10):146-159. [7] 宋葛龙,王明姬.教育科技人才体制机制一体改革的目标与思路:基于“十五五”时期的分析[J].宏观经济研究,2024(10):4-15. [8] 黄永春,钱春琳,钱昕怡,等.教育-科技-人才耦合协调度研究:基于30个省级区域的实证分析[J].中国科技论坛,2024(10):12-24. [9] 黄海刚,张伊华.教育科技人才耦合协调度的时空特征、互动关系和影响因素研究[J].中国软科学,2025(11):213-224. [10] 黄永春,钱昕怡,徐军海,等.中国“教育-人才-科技”纽带系统的转化效率研究[J/OL].科学学与科学技术管理,1-24[2026-09-08].https://doi.org/10.20201/j.cnki.ssstm.20250916.002. [11] 江郁,周建中.教育科技人才一体化发展评价指标体系构建:基于共生理论视角[J].科技管理研究,2025,45(14):61-68. [12] 李树英.打通推进教育科技人才一体发展堵点卡点的策略研究[J].中国高等教育,2025(20):9-14. [13] 王伟同,王杰.财政支持教育、科技、人才高质量发展的历史嬗变、理论框架与实践路径[J].北京社会科学,2025(10):16-27. [14] 楚中柱,吴建南,张润强.科创街区助力教育科技人才一体发展的作用机制与实施路径[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2025,45(6):14-22. [15] 甘宜涛.卓越工程师产教融合培养的场域困境及破解策略[J].北京社会科学,2024(5):110-118. [16] 苏屹,曹铮.京津冀区域协同创新网络演化及影响因素研究[J].科研管理,2023,44(3):43-55. [17] 王海花,王蒙怡,刘钊成.跨区域产学协同创新绩效的影响因素研究:依存型多层网络视角[J].科研管理,2022,43(2):81-89. [18] Glaser B,Strauss A.Discovery of grounded theory:strategies for qualitative research[M].London:Routledge,2017:1-21. [19] Eisenhardt K M.Building theories from case study research[J].Academy of Management Review,1989,14(4):532-550. [20] 贾哲敏.扎根理论在公共管理研究中的应用:方法与实践[J].中国行政管理,2015(3):90-95. [21] 马庆国.管理科学研究方法与研究生学位论文的评判参考标准[J].管理世界,2004(12):99-108,145. [22] Salamon L M.The tools of government:a guide to the new governance[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2002:552-564.
2026, 
