OFDI,Intellectual Property Right And Local Innovation

Since the reform and opening up,China’s economy has developed rapidly,and has made impressive achievements in many aspects.However,there are still problems that cannot be ignored in the extensive and rapid development.The disadvantages of high emission,serious pollution,low production efficiency and limited core technology are gradually exposed with the increase of China’s economic size.The transformation from "Made in China" to "Created in China" has become a topic that needs to be discussed at present.Among them,innovation is the core element in this topic.How to improve the level of innovation,improve the efficiency of innovation and promote the overall development of innovation has been repeatedly explored by scholars at home and abroad.As important factors affecting innovation,outward foreign direct investment(OFDI)and intellectual property protection(intellectual property protection)cannot be ignored in the research process.Especially at the moment when the scale of OFDI in China is expanding rapidly and the intellectual property protection system is gradually improved,in-depth discussion of the relationship between OFDI,intellectual property protection and local innovation in China can better help China to formulate relevant policies and promote local innovation and development.Previous literature has made a relatively complete summary of the relationship between the three.It mainly explores the direct effect of OFDI on innovation through technology spillover effect,industrial structure optimization effect,crowding out effect,etc;The dual nature of intellectual property protection for innovation;Under the influence of intellectual property protection,the impact of OFDI on innovation tends to be complex.After synthesizing the above articles,this paper finds that most of the existing scholars’ research on these three lacks a detailed exploration of one aspect,namely innovation itself.When exploring the impact of OFDI and intellectual property protection on innovation,we did not consider that innovation itself is a dynamic process,and only measuring it with an indicator may make the results incomplete.Therefore,this paper draws on the innovation value chain theory proposed by Hansen and Birkinshaw,which regards the whole innovation as a dynamic evolution chain,and the chain advances from the initial knowledge innovation to the final production of new products.This theory provides a basic framework for this study.On this framework,this paper divides the whole innovation into three stages: knowledge innovation,technology innovation and product innovation.The three stages move forward in a chain-like manner,forming the whole dynamic innovation process.Through theoretical analysis,it is found that innovation shows different characteristics at different stages in the process: knowledge innovation stage,as the source of the whole innovation,can continuously produce new knowledge through the theoretical knowledge reserve and inspiration of researchers and scholars,and has the independence of self-renewal without relying on the feedback of other two stages;Technological innovation and product innovation can also form their own innovation closed-loop,which is embodied in the use of existing knowledge to continuously innovate technology,sales methods and means to maximize efficiency close to the current level based on the current level of technology.The discussion of the independence and heterogeneity of the three stages can help us better understand the necessity of the study.Further,based on the heterogeneity of the innovation stage and linked to the theme to be studied in this paper,the extension idea of this paper is: "Is there heterogeneity in the impact of OFDI and intellectual property protection on local innovation in the dynamic evolution process of innovation chain?" In response to this,the article carried out a series of theoretical analysis and empirical research,and found that OFDI has no significant impact on the level of knowledge innovation in the knowledge innovation stage,Intellectual property protection has a significant positive incentive effect on the level of intellectual innovation;In the stage of technological innovation,OFDI has significantly and positively promoted the improvement of technological innovation,while intellectual property protection has no significant impact on technological innovation;At the stage of product innovation,OFDI has a significant positive effect on product innovation.However,the protection of intellectual property rights is the same at the same stage,and the impact on product innovation is not significant.Finally,after discussing the impact of OFDI and intellectual property protection on local innovation at each stage,it further analyzed whether OFDI’s impact on local innovation at each stage of innovation would be complicated under the impact of intellectual property protection.Because OFDI has no significant impact on knowledge innovation at the stage of knowledge innovation,there is not much discussion at this stage;In the stage of technological innovation,using the threshold model and taking intellectual property protection as the threshold variable,the empirical analysis shows that under the influence of intellectual property protection,OFDI’s impact on local innovation presents an inverted U-shaped nonlinear characteristic;At the stage of product innovation,it is also found that OFDI has a significant "double threshold" performance,and the positive impact of OFDI on product innovation is gradually decreasing under the protection of intellectual property rights.From the perspective of innovation value chain,this paper combs the relationship among OFDI,intellectual property protection and local innovation in stages,and finds that in the whole process of innovation,there are heterogeneous changes in the relationship between the three at different stages.This can help scholars further clarify the relationship between the three,and also enrich the relevant theories.It provides some feasible suggestions and references for China to better adhere to the "going out" strategy and formulate more reasonable intellectual property protection policies.