地方政府人才引进政策对创业活跃度的影响及机制研究

Research on the impact and mechanism of local government talent introduction policy on entrepreneurial activity

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系：

经济学院（数字经济学院）

作者：

许耕辅

导师：

陈怡安

导师单位：

经济学院（数字经济学院）

学位：

硕士

语种：

中文

关键词：

地方政府;人才引进;创业活跃度;多期双重差分法

摘要：

高技能人力资本对于区域创业活力与我国经济升级转型的至关重要。为促进创新发展、城市创业活力的提升，中央和各级地方政府出台了很多人才政策。国家高度重视人才政策在人才战略中的重要地位，各地方政府也先后制定和实施了各具特色和优势的引进人才政策措施，进一步完善了引进人才政策体系。同时，激发创业活力，促进城市创业活跃度提升，一定程度上能够减小经济下行的风险。因此本文采用多期双重差分法，同时进行异质性分析和机制检验，探究了2008年后地方政府人才引进政策出台对城市创业活跃度的促进作用以及其中的机制路径，并分析了政策效应在城市规模、行政等级、区位特征、市场潜能和不同行业类型下的差异大小。本文主要结论包括，地方政府人才引进政策整体来看提高了城市创业活跃度。异质性分析发现中小规模、低行政等级、胡焕庸线西北侧、低市场潜能城市和服务业的创业活跃度提升程度更大。机制分析发现地方政府人才引进政策通过风险投资集聚、城市创新水平、产业结构升级来提升创业活跃度。门槛效应分析发现创业活跃度的提升依赖于政府干预程度的提高，只有在政府干预一定程度增强的前提下，地方政府人才引进带来的城市创业活跃度的提升效应才能得到更大的释放，过大过小的政府干预程度都会减小地方政府人才引进政策对城市创业活跃度的作用力度。上述结论为地方政府人才引进政策的制定与执行提供了理论参考，丰富了人力资本理论和创业活跃度方面的研究，有助于提升中国的创新创业活力，使得我国就业机会更加公平和均衡。基于以上结论得到如下启示:首先，各地方政府应大力出台“引才计划”，多宣传人才政策，发出更强烈的政府支持信号。把人才引进政策反正更加重要的位置，大力引导高精尖人才流入中西部城市、服务行业等，为城市的发展带来活力，进一步带动城市创业活跃度的提高。人才引进政策应该向中小规模、低行政等级、胡焕庸线西北侧、低市场潜能城市和服务业倾斜，进一步提升增加这些区域的人才流入，使得这些城市能够得到更好的发展。其次，创业活跃度的提升依赖于风险投资集聚、城市创新水平、产业结构升级等，在城市风险投资增加的前提下，地方政府人才引进带来的城市创业活跃度的提升效应能得到更大的释放。风险投资聚集程度更大、城市创新水平更高、产业结构升级的企业，地方政府人才引进对这些城市带来的创业活跃度的提升效应也会得到更大的释放。故城市也应该在一定程度上提高城市创新水平，进行产业结构升级，利用更多的风险投资、更高的城市创新水平和大量的人才引进来带动企业的创业活跃度提升，提升城市创业活力，促进社会就业增加与社会公平，带动城市的高质量发展。最后，企业发现创业活跃度的提升依赖于政府干预的提高，过大过小的政府干预，都会减小人才引进政策对创业活跃度的作用力度。只有在政府干预一定程度增强的前提下，才能使得城市创业活跃度的提升效应才能得到更大的释放。政府应该适度提高对社会的干预程度，适当增加财政支出水平。

参考文献：

[1]白俊红,张艺璇,卞元超.创新驱动政策是否提升城市创业活跃度——来自国家创新型城市试点政策的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2022,(06):61-78.[2]蔡海亚,徐盈之.贸易开放是否影响了中国产业结构升级?[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2017,34(10):3-22.[3]陈刚.管制与创业——来自中国的微观证据[J].管理世界,2015,(05):89-99+187-188.[4]陈高生.转型期中国企业家特征对企业创业的影响[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008,(06):69-75.[5]陈曦,吴英巨,朱建华.新质生产力视角下地方人才引进与全要素生产率[J].经济管理,2024,46(12):104-120.[6]陈晓通,陈颖,李强.创业活跃度与产业结构升级——基于我国省份数据的经验分析[J].商业经济研究,2021,(18):176-178.[7]狄嘉,孙朋飞,苑春荟,等.数字经济发展驱动创业活跃度——基于国家大数据综合试验区的准自然实验[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2025,42(01):157-177.[8]杜群阳,俞航东.2003～2015年中国城市劳动力技能互补、收入水平与人口城镇化[J].地理科学,2019,39(04):525-532.[9]杜运周,刘秋辰,程建青.什么样的营商环境生态产生城市高创业活跃度？——基于制度组态的分析[J].管理世界,2020,36(09):141-155.[10]樊纲,王小鲁,张立文,等.中国各地区市场化相对进程报告[J].经济研究,2003,(03):9-18+89.[11]冯伟,李嘉佳.企业家精神与产业升级:基于经济增长原动力的视角[J].外国经济与管理,2019,41(06):29-42.[12]韩亮亮,彭伊,孟庆娜.数字普惠金融、创业活跃度与共同富裕——基于我国省际面板数据的经验研究[J].软科学,2023,37(03):18-24.[13]何凌云,陶东杰.高铁开通对知识溢出与城市创新水平的影响测度[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2020,37(02):125-142.[14]华岳,叶芸.绿色区位导向性政策的碳减排效应——来自国家生态工业示范园区的实践[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2023,40(04):94-112.[15]江艇.因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应[J].中国工业经济,2022,(05):100-120.[16]金智,彭辽.地方人才引进政策与公司人力资本[J].金融研究,2022,(10):117-134.[17]寇宗来、刘学悦，2017：《中国城市和产业创新力报告2017》，复旦大学产业发展研究中心.[18]李国锋,孙雨洁.文献量化视角下人才引进政策评估[J].科技管理研究,2020,40(04):61-72.[19]李宏彬,李杏,姚先国,等.企业家的创业与创新精神对中国经济增长的影响[J].经济研究,2009,44(10):99-108.[20]李晓园,刘雨濛.数字普惠金融如何促进农村创业?[J].经济管理,2021,43(12):24-40.[21]林毅夫.新结构经济学的理论基础和发展方向[J].经济评论,2017(03):4-16.[22]刘春林,田玲.人才政策“背书”能否促进企业创新[J].中国工业经济,2021,(03):156-173.[23]罗来军,蒋承,王亚章.融资歧视、市场扭曲与利润迷失——兼议虚拟经济对实体经济的影响[J].经济研究,2016,51(04):74-88.[24]罗勇根,杨金玉,陈世强.空气污染、人力资本流动与创新活力——基于个体专利发明的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2019,(10):99-117.[25]权小锋,刘佳伟,孙雅倩.设立企业博士后工作站促进技术创新吗——基于中国上市公司的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2020,(09):175-192.[26]石大千,丁海,卫平,等.智慧城市建设能否降低环境污染[J].中国工业经济,2018,(06):117-135.[27]孙晋云,白俊红,张艺璇.社会信用与城市创业活跃度[J].经济与管理研究,2024,45(03):75-93.[28]孙鲲鹏,罗婷,肖星.人才政策、研发人员招聘与企业创新[J].经济研究,2021,56(08):143-159.[29]孙锐,孙雨洁.我国地方创新创业人才引进政策量化研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2021,42(06):29-44.[30]谭伟杰,胡润哲.“智”巢何以引凤：智慧城市建设对地区创业活跃度的影响[J].经济与管理研究,2024,45(01):75-93..[31]王戴黎.外资企业工作经验与企业家创业活动:中国家户调查证据[J].管理世界,2014,(10):136-148.[32]王欣亮,汪晓燕,刘飞.社会福利、人才落户与区域创新绩效——对“抢人大战”的再审视[J].经济科学,2022,(03):65-78.[33]王勇,张耀辉.创业水平对产业结构升级的影响[J].经济问题,2022,(02):69-78.[34]吴晓瑜,王敏,李力行.中国的高房价是否阻碍了创业?[J].经济研究,2014,49(09):121-134.[35]许小平,谈炜.创业行为、产业结构与收入分配——一个跨国经验研究[J].工业技术经济,2020,39(12):129-137.[36]杨仁发,魏琴琴.营商环境对城市创新能力的影响研究——基于中介效应的实证检验[J].调研世界,2021,(10):35-43.[37]叶文平,李新春,陈强远.流动人口对城市创业活跃度的影响:机制与证据[J].经济研究,2018,53(06):157-170.[38]尹志超,公雪,郭沛瑶.移动支付对创业的影响——来自中国家庭金融调查的微观证据[J].中国工业经济,2019,(03):119-137.[39]尹志超,宋全云,吴雨,等.金融知识、创业决策和创业动机[J].管理世界,2015,(01):87-98.[40]于潇,徐英东.人口集聚对创业活跃度的影响：考虑集聚动态的效应与路径[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2022,32(09):151-163.[41]余明桂,范蕊,钟慧洁.中国产业政策与企业技术创新[J].中国工业经济,2016,(12):5-22.[42]张兵兵,陈思琪,曹历娟.城市因“智慧”而低碳吗?——来自智慧城市试点政策的探索[J].经济评论,2022,(06):132-149.[43]张莉,年永威,刘京军.土地市场波动与地方债——以城投债为例[J].经济学(季刊),2018,17(03):1103-1126.[44]张柳钦,李建生,孙伟增.制度创新、营商环境与城市创业活力——来自中国自由贸易试验区的证据[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2023,40(10):93-114.[45]赵富森,李璐.知识产权制度的创业效应研究——基于中国知识产权示范城市建设的经验证据[J].产业经济研究,2021,(06):44-57.[46]赵晶,孟维烜.官员视察对企业创新的影响——基于组织合法性的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2016,(09):109-126.[47]赵涛,张智,梁上坤.数字经济、创业活跃度与高质量发展——来自中国城市的经验证据[J].管理世界,2020,36(10):65-76.[48]钟腾,罗吉罡,汪昌云.地方政府人才引进政策促进了区域创新吗?——来自准自然实验的证据[J].金融研究,2021,(05):135-152.[49]周广肃,于磊.地方人才引进政策与家庭教育投资[J/OL].世界经济,2025,(04):117-143[2025-05-13].[50]周小虎. 中国创业竞争力发展报告[M]. 北京：经济管理出版社, 2018.12.[51]Acs, Zoltan J., et al. "Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: an ecosystem perspective." Small Business Economics 51 (2018): 501-514.[52]Arenius, Pia, and Maria Minniti. "Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship." Small business economics 24 (2005): 233-247.[53]Beck T, Levine R, Levkov A. Big bad banks? The winners and losers from bank deregulation in the United States[J]. The journal of finance, 2010, 65(5): 1637-1667.[54]Borusyak K, Jaravel X, Spiess J. Revisiting event-study designs: robust and efficient estimation[J]. Review of Economic Studies, 2024: rdae007.[55]Bosma, Niels, et al. "Institutions, entrepreneurship, and economic growth in Europe." Small Business Economics 51 (2018): 483-499.[56]Callaway B, Sant’Anna P H C. Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 200-230.[57]Chen J, Heng C S, Tan B C Y, et al. The distinct signaling effects of R&D subsidy and non-R&D subsidy on IPO performance of IT entrepreneurial firms in China[J]. Research Policy, 2018, 47(1): 108-120.[58]Du Y, Kim P H, Aldrich H E. Hybrid strategies, dysfunctional competition, and new venture performance in transition economies[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2016, 12(3): 469-501.[59]Glaeser, Edward L., Sari Pekkala Kerr, and William R. Kerr. "Entrepreneurship and urban growth: An empirical assessment with historical mines." Review of Economics and Statistics 97.2 (2015): 498-520.[60]Goodman-Bacon A. Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 254-277.[61]Hansen B E. Sample splitting and threshold estimation[J]. Econometrica, 2000, 68(3): 575-603.[62]Harris C D. The, Market as a Factor in the Localization of Industry in the United States[J]. Annals of the association of American geographers, 1954, 44(4): 315-348.[63]Heckman J J. A life-cycle model of earnings, learning, and consumption[J]. Journal of political economy, 1976, 84(4, Part 2): S9-S44.[64]Kim, Phillip H., and Howard E. Aldrich. "Social capital and entrepreneurship." Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship 1.2 (2005): 55-104.[65]Kong D, Qin N, **ang J. Minimum wage and entrepreneurship: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2021, 189: 320-336.[66]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography[J]. Journal of political economy, 1991, 99(3): 483-499.[67]Li L, Chen J, Gao H, et al. The certification effect of government R&D subsidies on innovative entrepreneurial firms’ access to bank finance: Evidence from China[J]. Small Business Economics, 2019, 52: 241-259.[68]Lim D S K, Morse E A, Mitchell R K, et al. Institutional environment and entrepreneurial cognitions: A comparative business systems perspective[J]. Entrepreneurship theory and Practice, 2010, 34(3): 491-516.[69]Liu Q, Lu Y. Firm investment and exporting: Evidence from China's value-added tax reform[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2015, 97(2): 392-403.[70]Lu Y, Wang J, Zhu L. Place-based policies, creation, and agglomeration economies: Evidence from China’s economic zone program[J]. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2019, 11(3): 325-360.[71]McKenzie D. Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: Experimental evidence from a business plan competition[J]. American Economic Review, 2017, 107(8): 2278-2307.[72]Noseleit, Florian. "Entrepreneurship, structural change, and economic growth." Journal of Evolutionary Economics 23 (2013): 735-766.[73]Nurmalia, Djoni Hartono, and Irfani Fithria Ummul Muzayanah. "The roles of entrepreneurship on regional economic growth in Indonesia." Journal of the Knowledge Economy 11.1 (2020): 28-41.[74]Raijman R. Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions: Mexican immigrants in Chicago[J]. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 2001, 30(5): 393-411.[75]Reynolds, Paul, et al. "Global entrepreneurship monitor: Data collection design and implementation 1998–2003." Small business economics 24 (2005): 205-231.[76]Rosenbaum P R, Rubin D B. Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 1983, 45(2): 212-218.[77]Schumpeter, Joseph Alois,Elliott, John E..The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle[M].Transaction Publishers.1982.[78]Spence M. Job market signaling[M]//Uncertainty in economics. Academic Press, 1978: 281-306.[79]Sun L, Abraham S. Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 175-199.[80]Tavassoli, Sam, Martin Obschonka, and David B. Audretsch. "Entrepreneurship in cities." Research Policy 50.7 (2021): 104255.[81]Wang Q. Fixed-effect panel threshold model using Stata[J]. The stata journal, 2015, 15(1): 121-134.

学科：

应用经济学

提交日期：

2025-05-23

引用参考：

许耕辅. 地方政府人才引进政策对创业活跃度的影响及机制研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2025.

全文附件授权许可：

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 地方政府人才引进政策对创业活跃度的影响及机制研究
  • dc.title
  • Research on the impact and mechanism of local government talent introduction policy on entrepreneurial activity
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20220202000034
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 许耕辅
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 经济学院（数字经济学院）
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 经济学硕士学位
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2025
  • dc.contributor.direction
  • 劳动力市场、人才创新
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 陈怡安
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 经济学院（数字经济学院）
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 地方政府,人才引进,创业活跃度,多期双重差分法
  • dc.subject
  • local government; talent introduction; entrepreneurial activity; Multi-period difference-in-difference method
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 高技能人力资本对于区域创业活力与我国经济升级转型的至关重要。为促进创新发展、城市创业活力的提升，中央和各级地方政府出台了很多人才政策。国家高度重视人才政策在人才战略中的重要地位，各地方政府也先后制定和实施了各具特色和优势的引进人才政策措施，进一步完善了引进人才政策体系。同时，激发创业活力，促进城市创业活跃度提升，一定程度上能够减小经济下行的风险。因此本文采用多期双重差分法，同时进行异质性分析和机制检验，探究了2008年后地方政府人才引进政策出台对城市创业活跃度的促进作用以及其中的机制路径，并分析了政策效应在城市规模、行政等级、区位特征、市场潜能和不同行业类型下的差异大小。本文主要结论包括，地方政府人才引进政策整体来看提高了城市创业活跃度。异质性分析发现中小规模、低行政等级、胡焕庸线西北侧、低市场潜能城市和服务业的创业活跃度提升程度更大。机制分析发现地方政府人才引进政策通过风险投资集聚、城市创新水平、产业结构升级来提升创业活跃度。门槛效应分析发现创业活跃度的提升依赖于政府干预程度的提高，只有在政府干预一定程度增强的前提下，地方政府人才引进带来的城市创业活跃度的提升效应才能得到更大的释放，过大过小的政府干预程度都会减小地方政府人才引进政策对城市创业活跃度的作用力度。上述结论为地方政府人才引进政策的制定与执行提供了理论参考，丰富了人力资本理论和创业活跃度方面的研究，有助于提升中国的创新创业活力，使得我国就业机会更加公平和均衡。基于以上结论得到如下启示:首先，各地方政府应大力出台“引才计划”，多宣传人才政策，发出更强烈的政府支持信号。把人才引进政策反正更加重要的位置，大力引导高精尖人才流入中西部城市、服务行业等，为城市的发展带来活力，进一步带动城市创业活跃度的提高。人才引进政策应该向中小规模、低行政等级、胡焕庸线西北侧、低市场潜能城市和服务业倾斜，进一步提升增加这些区域的人才流入，使得这些城市能够得到更好的发展。其次，创业活跃度的提升依赖于风险投资集聚、城市创新水平、产业结构升级等，在城市风险投资增加的前提下，地方政府人才引进带来的城市创业活跃度的提升效应能得到更大的释放。风险投资聚集程度更大、城市创新水平更高、产业结构升级的企业，地方政府人才引进对这些城市带来的创业活跃度的提升效应也会得到更大的释放。故城市也应该在一定程度上提高城市创新水平，进行产业结构升级，利用更多的风险投资、更高的城市创新水平和大量的人才引进来带动企业的创业活跃度提升，提升城市创业活力，促进社会就业增加与社会公平，带动城市的高质量发展。最后，企业发现创业活跃度的提升依赖于政府干预的提高，过大过小的政府干预，都会减小人才引进政策对创业活跃度的作用力度。只有在政府干预一定程度增强的前提下，才能使得城市创业活跃度的提升效应才能得到更大的释放。政府应该适度提高对社会的干预程度，适当增加财政支出水平。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • High-skilled human capital is crucial to the vitality of regional entrepreneurship and China's economic upgrading and transformation. In order to promote innovation and development and enhance the vitality of urban entrepreneurship, the central government and local governments at all levels have issued many talent policies. The state attaches great importance to the important position of talent policy in the talent strategy, and local governments have successively formulated and implemented policies and measures for the introduction of talents with their own characteristics and advantages, and further improved the policy system for introducing talents. At the same time, stimulating entrepreneurial vitality and promoting the increase of urban entrepreneurial activity can reduce the risk of economic downturn to a certain extent. Therefore, this paper uses the multi-period difference-in-difference method, heterogeneity analysis and mechanism test to explore the promotion effect of local government talent introduction policies on urban entrepreneurship activity after 2008 and the mechanism path, and analyzes the differences of policy effects in urban scale, administrative level, location characteristics, market potential and different industry types.The main conclusions of this paper include that the local government talent introduction policy has improved the entrepreneurial activity of cities as a whole. Heterogeneity analysis found that the entrepreneurial activity of small and medium-sized cities, cities with low administrative level, northwest side of Hu Huanyong Line, low market potential, and service industry increased to a greater extent. Mechanism analysis shows that local government talent introduction policies enhance entrepreneurial activity through venture capital agglomeration, urban innovation level, and industrial structure upgrading. The threshold effect analysis shows that the improvement of entrepreneurial activity depends on the improvement of the degree of government intervention, and only under the premise that the government intervention is enhanced to a certain extent, the improvement effect of urban entrepreneurial activity brought by the introduction of local government talents can be released greatly, and the degree of government intervention that is too large or too small will reduce the effect of local government talent introduction policy on urban entrepreneurial activity.The above conclusions provide a theoretical reference for the formulation and implementation of local government talent introduction policies, enrich the research on human capital theory and entrepreneurial activity, help to enhance the vitality of innovation and entrepreneurship in China, and make China's employment opportunities more equitable and balanced. Based on the above conclusions, the following enlightenment is obtained:First of all, local governments should vigorously introduce "talent introduction plans", publicize talent policies, and send a stronger signal of government support. The talent introduction policy will be more important anyway, and vigorously guide high-tech talents to flow into the central and western cities, service industries, etc., so as to bring vitality to the development of the city and further promote the improvement of urban entrepreneurial activity. The talent introduction policy should be tilted towards small and medium-sized, low-administrative, northwestern Huhuanyong Line, low-market potential cities and service industries, and further enhance the inflow of talents in these regions, so that these cities can achieve better development.Secondly, the improvement of entrepreneurial activity depends on the agglomeration of venture capital, the level of urban innovation, and the upgrading of industrial structure. Enterprises with a greater concentration of venture capital, a higher level of urban innovation, and an upgraded industrial structure will also have a greater effect on the promotion of entrepreneurial activity brought by the introduction of local government talents to these cities. Therefore, cities should also improve the level of urban innovation to a certain extent, upgrade the industrial structure, and use more venture capital, higher urban innovation level and a large number of talents to promote the entrepreneurial activity of enterprises, enhance the vitality of urban entrepreneurship, promote the increase of social employment and social equity, and promote the high-quality development of the city.Finally, enterprises find that the increase of entrepreneurial activity depends on the increase of government intervention, and too large and too small government intervention will reduce the effect of talent introduction policies on entrepreneurial activity. Only under the premise of increasing government intervention to a certain extent, can the effect of improving urban entrepreneurial activity be released. The government should appropriately increase the degree of intervention in society and appropriately increase the level of fiscal expenditure.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2025-05-23
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2025-05-15
  • dc.relation.citedreferences
  • [1]白俊红,张艺璇,卞元超.创新驱动政策是否提升城市创业活跃度——来自国家创新型城市试点政策的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2022,(06):61-78.[2]蔡海亚,徐盈之.贸易开放是否影响了中国产业结构升级?[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2017,34(10):3-22.[3]陈刚.管制与创业——来自中国的微观证据[J].管理世界,2015,(05):89-99+187-188.[4]陈高生.转型期中国企业家特征对企业创业的影响[J].经济理论与经济管理,2008,(06):69-75.[5]陈曦,吴英巨,朱建华.新质生产力视角下地方人才引进与全要素生产率[J].经济管理,2024,46(12):104-120.[6]陈晓通,陈颖,李强.创业活跃度与产业结构升级——基于我国省份数据的经验分析[J].商业经济研究,2021,(18):176-178.[7]狄嘉,孙朋飞,苑春荟,等.数字经济发展驱动创业活跃度——基于国家大数据综合试验区的准自然实验[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2025,42(01):157-177.[8]杜群阳,俞航东.2003～2015年中国城市劳动力技能互补、收入水平与人口城镇化[J].地理科学,2019,39(04):525-532.[9]杜运周,刘秋辰,程建青.什么样的营商环境生态产生城市高创业活跃度？——基于制度组态的分析[J].管理世界,2020,36(09):141-155.[10]樊纲,王小鲁,张立文,等.中国各地区市场化相对进程报告[J].经济研究,2003,(03):9-18+89.[11]冯伟,李嘉佳.企业家精神与产业升级:基于经济增长原动力的视角[J].外国经济与管理,2019,41(06):29-42.[12]韩亮亮,彭伊,孟庆娜.数字普惠金融、创业活跃度与共同富裕——基于我国省际面板数据的经验研究[J].软科学,2023,37(03):18-24.[13]何凌云,陶东杰.高铁开通对知识溢出与城市创新水平的影响测度[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2020,37(02):125-142.[14]华岳,叶芸.绿色区位导向性政策的碳减排效应——来自国家生态工业示范园区的实践[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2023,40(04):94-112.[15]江艇.因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应[J].中国工业经济,2022,(05):100-120.[16]金智,彭辽.地方人才引进政策与公司人力资本[J].金融研究,2022,(10):117-134.[17]寇宗来、刘学悦，2017：《中国城市和产业创新力报告2017》，复旦大学产业发展研究中心.[18]李国锋,孙雨洁.文献量化视角下人才引进政策评估[J].科技管理研究,2020,40(04):61-72.[19]李宏彬,李杏,姚先国,等.企业家的创业与创新精神对中国经济增长的影响[J].经济研究,2009,44(10):99-108.[20]李晓园,刘雨濛.数字普惠金融如何促进农村创业?[J].经济管理,2021,43(12):24-40.[21]林毅夫.新结构经济学的理论基础和发展方向[J].经济评论,2017(03):4-16.[22]刘春林,田玲.人才政策“背书”能否促进企业创新[J].中国工业经济,2021,(03):156-173.[23]罗来军,蒋承,王亚章.融资歧视、市场扭曲与利润迷失——兼议虚拟经济对实体经济的影响[J].经济研究,2016,51(04):74-88.[24]罗勇根,杨金玉,陈世强.空气污染、人力资本流动与创新活力——基于个体专利发明的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2019,(10):99-117.[25]权小锋,刘佳伟,孙雅倩.设立企业博士后工作站促进技术创新吗——基于中国上市公司的经验证据[J].中国工业经济,2020,(09):175-192.[26]石大千,丁海,卫平,等.智慧城市建设能否降低环境污染[J].中国工业经济,2018,(06):117-135.[27]孙晋云,白俊红,张艺璇.社会信用与城市创业活跃度[J].经济与管理研究,2024,45(03):75-93.[28]孙鲲鹏,罗婷,肖星.人才政策、研发人员招聘与企业创新[J].经济研究,2021,56(08):143-159.[29]孙锐,孙雨洁.我国地方创新创业人才引进政策量化研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2021,42(06):29-44.[30]谭伟杰,胡润哲.“智”巢何以引凤：智慧城市建设对地区创业活跃度的影响[J].经济与管理研究,2024,45(01):75-93..[31]王戴黎.外资企业工作经验与企业家创业活动:中国家户调查证据[J].管理世界,2014,(10):136-148.[32]王欣亮,汪晓燕,刘飞.社会福利、人才落户与区域创新绩效——对“抢人大战”的再审视[J].经济科学,2022,(03):65-78.[33]王勇,张耀辉.创业水平对产业结构升级的影响[J].经济问题,2022,(02):69-78.[34]吴晓瑜,王敏,李力行.中国的高房价是否阻碍了创业?[J].经济研究,2014,49(09):121-134.[35]许小平,谈炜.创业行为、产业结构与收入分配——一个跨国经验研究[J].工业技术经济,2020,39(12):129-137.[36]杨仁发,魏琴琴.营商环境对城市创新能力的影响研究——基于中介效应的实证检验[J].调研世界,2021,(10):35-43.[37]叶文平,李新春,陈强远.流动人口对城市创业活跃度的影响:机制与证据[J].经济研究,2018,53(06):157-170.[38]尹志超,公雪,郭沛瑶.移动支付对创业的影响——来自中国家庭金融调查的微观证据[J].中国工业经济,2019,(03):119-137.[39]尹志超,宋全云,吴雨,等.金融知识、创业决策和创业动机[J].管理世界,2015,(01):87-98.[40]于潇,徐英东.人口集聚对创业活跃度的影响：考虑集聚动态的效应与路径[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2022,32(09):151-163.[41]余明桂,范蕊,钟慧洁.中国产业政策与企业技术创新[J].中国工业经济,2016,(12):5-22.[42]张兵兵,陈思琪,曹历娟.城市因“智慧”而低碳吗?——来自智慧城市试点政策的探索[J].经济评论,2022,(06):132-149.[43]张莉,年永威,刘京军.土地市场波动与地方债——以城投债为例[J].经济学(季刊),2018,17(03):1103-1126.[44]张柳钦,李建生,孙伟增.制度创新、营商环境与城市创业活力——来自中国自由贸易试验区的证据[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2023,40(10):93-114.[45]赵富森,李璐.知识产权制度的创业效应研究——基于中国知识产权示范城市建设的经验证据[J].产业经济研究,2021,(06):44-57.[46]赵晶,孟维烜.官员视察对企业创新的影响——基于组织合法性的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2016,(09):109-126.[47]赵涛,张智,梁上坤.数字经济、创业活跃度与高质量发展——来自中国城市的经验证据[J].管理世界,2020,36(10):65-76.[48]钟腾,罗吉罡,汪昌云.地方政府人才引进政策促进了区域创新吗?——来自准自然实验的证据[J].金融研究,2021,(05):135-152.[49]周广肃,于磊.地方人才引进政策与家庭教育投资[J/OL].世界经济,2025,(04):117-143[2025-05-13].[50]周小虎. 中国创业竞争力发展报告[M]. 北京：经济管理出版社, 2018.12.[51]Acs, Zoltan J., et al. "Entrepreneurship, institutional economics, and economic growth: an ecosystem perspective." Small Business Economics 51 (2018): 501-514.[52]Arenius, Pia, and Maria Minniti. "Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship." Small business economics 24 (2005): 233-247.[53]Beck T, Levine R, Levkov A. Big bad banks? The winners and losers from bank deregulation in the United States[J]. The journal of finance, 2010, 65(5): 1637-1667.[54]Borusyak K, Jaravel X, Spiess J. Revisiting event-study designs: robust and efficient estimation[J]. Review of Economic Studies, 2024: rdae007.[55]Bosma, Niels, et al. "Institutions, entrepreneurship, and economic growth in Europe." Small Business Economics 51 (2018): 483-499.[56]Callaway B, Sant’Anna P H C. Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 200-230.[57]Chen J, Heng C S, Tan B C Y, et al. The distinct signaling effects of R&D subsidy and non-R&D subsidy on IPO performance of IT entrepreneurial firms in China[J]. Research Policy, 2018, 47(1): 108-120.[58]Du Y, Kim P H, Aldrich H E. Hybrid strategies, dysfunctional competition, and new venture performance in transition economies[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2016, 12(3): 469-501.[59]Glaeser, Edward L., Sari Pekkala Kerr, and William R. Kerr. "Entrepreneurship and urban growth: An empirical assessment with historical mines." Review of Economics and Statistics 97.2 (2015): 498-520.[60]Goodman-Bacon A. Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 254-277.[61]Hansen B E. Sample splitting and threshold estimation[J]. Econometrica, 2000, 68(3): 575-603.[62]Harris C D. The, Market as a Factor in the Localization of Industry in the United States[J]. Annals of the association of American geographers, 1954, 44(4): 315-348.[63]Heckman J J. A life-cycle model of earnings, learning, and consumption[J]. Journal of political economy, 1976, 84(4, Part 2): S9-S44.[64]Kim, Phillip H., and Howard E. Aldrich. "Social capital and entrepreneurship." Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship 1.2 (2005): 55-104.[65]Kong D, Qin N, **ang J. Minimum wage and entrepreneurship: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2021, 189: 320-336.[66]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography[J]. Journal of political economy, 1991, 99(3): 483-499.[67]Li L, Chen J, Gao H, et al. The certification effect of government R&D subsidies on innovative entrepreneurial firms’ access to bank finance: Evidence from China[J]. Small Business Economics, 2019, 52: 241-259.[68]Lim D S K, Morse E A, Mitchell R K, et al. Institutional environment and entrepreneurial cognitions: A comparative business systems perspective[J]. Entrepreneurship theory and Practice, 2010, 34(3): 491-516.[69]Liu Q, Lu Y. Firm investment and exporting: Evidence from China's value-added tax reform[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2015, 97(2): 392-403.[70]Lu Y, Wang J, Zhu L. Place-based policies, creation, and agglomeration economies: Evidence from China’s economic zone program[J]. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2019, 11(3): 325-360.[71]McKenzie D. Identifying and spurring high-growth entrepreneurship: Experimental evidence from a business plan competition[J]. American Economic Review, 2017, 107(8): 2278-2307.[72]Noseleit, Florian. "Entrepreneurship, structural change, and economic growth." Journal of Evolutionary Economics 23 (2013): 735-766.[73]Nurmalia, Djoni Hartono, and Irfani Fithria Ummul Muzayanah. "The roles of entrepreneurship on regional economic growth in Indonesia." Journal of the Knowledge Economy 11.1 (2020): 28-41.[74]Raijman R. Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions: Mexican immigrants in Chicago[J]. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 2001, 30(5): 393-411.[75]Reynolds, Paul, et al. "Global entrepreneurship monitor: Data collection design and implementation 1998–2003." Small business economics 24 (2005): 205-231.[76]Rosenbaum P R, Rubin D B. Assessing sensitivity to an unobserved binary covariate in an observational study with binary outcome[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 1983, 45(2): 212-218.[77]Schumpeter, Joseph Alois,Elliott, John E..The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle[M].Transaction Publishers.1982.[78]Spence M. Job market signaling[M]//Uncertainty in economics. Academic Press, 1978: 281-306.[79]Sun L, Abraham S. Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects[J]. Journal of econometrics, 2021, 225(2): 175-199.[80]Tavassoli, Sam, Martin Obschonka, and David B. Audretsch. "Entrepreneurship in cities." Research Policy 50.7 (2021): 104255.[81]Wang Q. Fixed-effect panel threshold model using Stata[J]. The stata journal, 2015, 15(1): 121-134.
回到顶部