High-speed rail and regional innovation: How well is it measured?

IF 3.8 Q2 TRANSPORTATION
Nicholas Hurley , Liton Kamruzzaman , Graham Currie
{"title":"High-speed rail and regional innovation: How well is it measured?","authors":"Nicholas Hurley ,&nbsp;Liton Kamruzzaman ,&nbsp;Graham Currie","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2025.101647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Establishing a causal link between high-speed rail (HSR) and regional innovation, and capturing the relationship’s complexity, presents significant methodological challenges. While HSR is theorised to boost innovation via enhanced connectivity, proving this link robustly requires navigating issues like non-random network placement, spatial spillovers, network effects, and appropriate measurement of both HSR exposure and innovation outcomes. This study systematically reviews recent literature to critically evaluate how this relationship is measured. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this systematic literature review synthesises methodological insights from a final analysis set of 35 key studies (32 empirical, 3 conceptual/review papers). Results show a clear evolution towards quasi-experimental methods, particularly difference-in-differences and its spatial variants often combined with instrumental variables to address endogeneity. However, significant challenges remain: establishing causal validity (parallel trends, instrument validity), adequately measuring HSR exposure beyond simple connectivity, capturing heterogeneous effects, modelling complex spatial dynamics (concentration, decay), and empirically validating intermediate mechanisms like tacit knowledge transfer, which often remain a theoretical 'black box'. In addition, most methodological explorations were conducted in the context of Chinese HSR, raising concerns about external validity. We conclude that while methodological sophistication is increasing, current approaches struggle to fully capture the systemic complexity and provide uncontroversial causal evidence. Future progress requires methodological pluralism (use of multiple methods), integrating advanced econometrics with tools like agent-based modelling, network science, machine learning, and qualitative methods, alongside richer data and comparative research beyond China, to provide more robust and nuanced insights for policy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"34 ","pages":"Article 101647"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198225003264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Establishing a causal link between high-speed rail (HSR) and regional innovation, and capturing the relationship’s complexity, presents significant methodological challenges. While HSR is theorised to boost innovation via enhanced connectivity, proving this link robustly requires navigating issues like non-random network placement, spatial spillovers, network effects, and appropriate measurement of both HSR exposure and innovation outcomes. This study systematically reviews recent literature to critically evaluate how this relationship is measured. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this systematic literature review synthesises methodological insights from a final analysis set of 35 key studies (32 empirical, 3 conceptual/review papers). Results show a clear evolution towards quasi-experimental methods, particularly difference-in-differences and its spatial variants often combined with instrumental variables to address endogeneity. However, significant challenges remain: establishing causal validity (parallel trends, instrument validity), adequately measuring HSR exposure beyond simple connectivity, capturing heterogeneous effects, modelling complex spatial dynamics (concentration, decay), and empirically validating intermediate mechanisms like tacit knowledge transfer, which often remain a theoretical 'black box'. In addition, most methodological explorations were conducted in the context of Chinese HSR, raising concerns about external validity. We conclude that while methodological sophistication is increasing, current approaches struggle to fully capture the systemic complexity and provide uncontroversial causal evidence. Future progress requires methodological pluralism (use of multiple methods), integrating advanced econometrics with tools like agent-based modelling, network science, machine learning, and qualitative methods, alongside richer data and comparative research beyond China, to provide more robust and nuanced insights for policy.

Abstract Image

高铁与区域创新:衡量得如何?
建立高速铁路(HSR)与区域创新之间的因果关系,并把握这种关系的复杂性,在方法论上提出了重大挑战。虽然高铁理论上可以通过增强连通性来促进创新,但要证明这种联系强有力,需要解决一些问题,如非随机网络布局、空间溢出、网络效应,以及对高铁风险和创新成果的适当衡量。本研究系统地回顾了最近的文献,批判性地评估了这种关系是如何测量的。根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,本系统文献综述综合了35项关键研究(32项实证研究,3篇概念/综述论文)的最终分析方法见解。结果显示准实验方法的明显演变,特别是差异中的差异及其空间变异通常与工具变量相结合以解决内生性问题。然而,重大挑战仍然存在:建立因果效度(平行趋势,工具效度),充分测量高铁暴露于简单连通性之外,捕获异质效应,模拟复杂的空间动态(浓度,衰减),以及经验验证中间机制,如隐性知识转移,这通常仍然是理论上的“黑箱”。此外,大多数方法探索都是在中国高铁的背景下进行的,这引起了对外部效度的担忧。我们的结论是,虽然方法的复杂性正在增加,但目前的方法难以完全捕捉系统复杂性并提供无争议的因果证据。未来的进展需要方法论多元化(使用多种方法),将先进的计量经济学与基于主体的建模、网络科学、机器学习和定性方法等工具结合起来,同时提供更丰富的数据和中国以外的比较研究,为政策提供更有力、更细致的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Engineering-Automotive Engineering
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信