State Policy Regimes and Associational Roles in Technology Development: A Tale of Two Metropolises

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Society Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1177/00323292211070077

Xiaoke Zhang

引用次数: 1

Abstract

The lead trade associations of the bio-pharma and semiconductor industries have differed systematically in their roles in facilitating the development of innovation networks between Shanghai and Shenzhen, two prominent high-tech metropolises in China. Divergent associational roles stem from variations in the regional state policy regime that has exerted differential shaping influence on the structure of social cleavages and strength of reciprocity norms among member firms and on their willingness to actively and cooperatively engage in association-led networking activities. The bio-pharma and semiconductor associations whose network-building roles have been structured differently through varied state policy regimes have displayed dissimilar abilities to reduce network failures and promote the innovation competences of their member firms between the two metropolises. The empirical findings of the article carry important implications for understanding the causes and consequences of varied associational roles in the process of technology development in China, other emerging markets, and beyond.

查看原文本刊更多论文

国家政策体制与技术发展中的联合作用：两个大都市的故事

不同的协会角色源于区域国家政策制度的差异，这些政策制度对成员企业之间的社会分裂结构和互惠规范的强度以及他们积极合作地参与协会主导的网络活动的意愿产生了不同的影响。通过不同的国家政策制度，生物制药和半导体协会在网络建设方面的作用有所不同，在两个大都市之间，它们在减少网络故障和促进成员公司创新能力方面表现出不同的能力。本文的实证结果对于理解中国、其他新兴市场及其他地区技术发展过程中各种关联角色的原因和后果具有重要意义。

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

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.