【作者】 杨洋；

【导师】 徐承红；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 区域经济学， 2023， 博士

【摘要】 自进入“新常态”以来,我国经济社会发生了一系列深刻转变。党的十九大报告指出,“我国经济已由高速增长阶段转向高质量发展阶段”,“我国社会主要矛盾已经转化为人民日益增长的美好生活需要和不平衡不充分的发展之间的矛盾”。创新是高质量发展的第一动力,创业是创新的延伸环节,尤其是高技术、高创新性创业既依托于创新,也有助于创新,因而创新创业在助推高质量发展中具有关键作用。社会主要矛盾转变说明人们对生活质量的要求日益提高,也越来越全面,必然对城市宜居品质提出更高要求,特别是对高素质人才而言更是如此。随着我国人口流动规模持续扩大、流动障碍逐渐破除,跨城市人口迁移愈发普遍,城市能否吸引或留住创新创业所需人才对于其加快高质量发展具有重大意义。基于此,本研究深入探讨了宜居性与城市创新创业之间的关系,为城市打造宜居品质、提升创新创业活力以及加快高质量发展提供有益参考。本文首先界定了与本研究相关的概念,进而对宜居性与创新创业的相关文献进行了梳理与简评,总结了已有研究有待改进之处;其次,对宜居性促进城市创新创业的理论机制进行了深入分析,并探讨了创新制度环境对宜居性影响城市创新的调节效应机制和创业市场环境对宜居性影响创业的调节效应机制,以及宜居性促进城市创新创业的空间效应机制;再次,在建立城市宜居性评价指标的基础上,对我国城市宜居性的时空分异特征事实进行解析,对比了我国主要城市与国外城市的宜居水平;再次,分别实证检验了宜居性与城市创新和创业间的关系及其相应的调节效应、空间效应,并实证分析了宜居性对创新质量、绿色创新、数字创业的作用等关乎高质量发展的更为具体的问题,利用微观数据检验了宜居性影响创新创业的人才迁移机制和活力提升机制;最后,针对研究结果,得出本文研究启示,并针对如何加快城市宜居品质提升给出了政策建议。本研究的主要结论如下:(1)对我国城市宜居水平的时空差异和国际对比进行分析表明,我国城市宜居水平整体快速提升,但同国际一流宜居城市相比,仍有较大差距,即便是苏州、上海、北京等主要城市的宜居水平也仅在国际上处于中等水平。城市间宜居水平差距明显,并且此差距存在扩大趋势,城市间宜居性差距主要由区域间差距和低宜居水平区域内高宜居城市与高宜居水平内低宜居城市间的差距引起,区域内差距相对较小。都市圈城市相较于非都市圈城市宜居水平更高,尤其是体现在教育、基础设施、医疗保健等方面;东部城市宜居水平总体高于中西部城市,这尤其体现在文化与环境、教育、基础设施等方面,都市圈与非都市圈、东部城市与中西部城市间宜居水平的差距与人口流动和创新创业人才集聚的方向相一致。城市间创新创业水平总体处于快速提升阶段,但城市间差距明显,都市圈与非都市圈、东部城市与中西部城市之间在创新创业方面存在着明显差距,此差距与城市间宜居水平的差距也一致,而城市间创业活力差距在近年存在扩大趋势。政府对宜居性改善的重视不够,由此引发的宜居条件改善力度不足、城市土地资源供给失衡等障碍限制了宜居品质提升。(2)在对宜居性与城市创新间的关系进行实证检验时,本研究发现,城市宜居性对创新存在显著积极影响,使用人均专利数量、宜居性排名和变换模型等方式进行一系列稳健性检验和内生性处理后结论仍然成立;宜居性不仅对创新规模有积极影响,也对城市创新质量提升有明显促进作用,而替换指标的稳健性检验还说明了宜居性对城市创新排名提升存在积极意义。异质性分析发现,宜居性对创新的促进作用在2012年后更强,在东中部城市、都市圈城市、人力资本水平高的城市、经济发展水平高的城市、第三产业比重高的城市表现地更为明显,显示随着经济社会发展,宜居性的创新促进效应将随之凸显。城市宜居性对创新的积极影响随地区创新制度环境优化而增强,在知识产权保护环境更好、更有利于开展创新事业的“宜业”城市,“宜居”因素对创新的积极影响更大,显示“宜居”、“宜业”在促进创新方面相得益彰的互补关系。城市宜居性的创新促进作用存在空间溢出效应,在带动自身创新的同时,也有益于邻近城市创新;此外,宜居性对城市绿色技术创新和绿色技术选择也具有积极作用,尤其是对于东部城市而言。(3)在对宜居性与城市创业间的关系进行实证检验时,本研究发现,城市宜居性对创业具有显著积极作用,此影响在一系列稳健性检验和内生性处理后仍然成立。城市宜居性对创业的促进作用在2012年前并未显现,但在2012年后显现出来,其对创业的积极影响在东中部城市、都市圈城市、人力资本水平高的城市、服务型城市、经济水平高的城市、人口密度高的城市体现更为明显,说明随着经济社会的发展,宜居性对创业的积极作用随之显现。宜居性对城市创业的促进作用随创业市场环境的优化而提升,在市场化程度更高、有利于企业经营的“宜业”城市,“宜居”因素对创业的促进作用更强,“宜居”与“宜业”是相互促进的互补关系。宜居性不仅对本地创业具有积极影响,也对邻近城市创业表现出促进作用,其创业促进作用具有空间溢出效应;并且会对数字型创业活动也产生正向影响,反映了宜居品质在城市加快技术变革和产业转型升级过程中的积极价值。(4)本研究在理论分析部分将宜居性影响城市创新创业的微观机制概括为人才迁移机制和活力提升机制,并分别对二者进行了检验。在对人才迁移机制进行检验时,本研究从微观个体迁移决策和宏观总体迁移规模两个角度着手,基于微观个体迁移决策的检验发现,宜居性对创新创业所需人才的迁入具有明显促进作用,高人力资本的人才和创业人才倾向于迁入宜居水平更高的城市,并且宜居性对高人力资本的人才和创业人才迁入的积极作用明显大于普通人群,随着时间的推移宜居性对迁移个体迁入决策的积极作用也不断增强,显示随着经济社会发展人们对医疗、教育、基础设施、消费等宜居条件越来越重视;基于宏观总体迁移规模的检验发现,宜居性有助于城市吸引更多迁移人口,有利于城市迁入人口规模和迁入人力资本规模的扩大,并且对吸引高人力资本个体迁入规模扩大的积极作用更大。在对人才活力提升机制进行检验时,本研究直接利用创新者和创业者的微观数据进行分析,发现宜居水平提升有利于发明人创新产出增加,也对个体选择创业产生积极影响,从而说明了宜居性能够提升个体创新创业活力。本研究的主要创新之处包括:研究视角创新。文章强调了城市的生活空间职能,从城市宜居性视角出发,同时考察了城市宜居要素对城市创新和城市创业的影响,并将其微观机制概括为人才迁移机制和活力提升机制,并借助微观数据对机制进行了检验,有助于进一步增进对城市宜居性作用的理解,有利于进一步拓展对城市创新创业驱动路径的认识,为城市提升宜居品质提供了更加明确的激励。研究内容创新。一是本研究着重关注了宜居性对城市创业的影响,创业是创新的延伸环节,其内核是创新,二者共同体现城市的“创造性”或者说是“创新性”,拓展了现有文献中有关宜居性经济效应的研究。二是本研究在考察宜居性对城市创新的影响时,进一步丰富了对宜居性创新效应的分析,包括宜居性对城市创新质量的影响、对城市绿色技术创新和绿色技术选择的作用等。三是从多角度考察了宜居性对不同阶段、不同区域、不同类型城市创新创业影响的异质性,为宜居性作用将随经济社会发展水平提高而增强、未来城市应更加重视宜居品质的结论提供了实证依据。四是文章关注了制度环境对宜居性影响创新的调节效应和市场环境对宜居性影响创业的调节效应,以及宜居性影响创新创业的空间效应等问题,这也拓展了有关城市宜居性作用和创新创业影响因素的研究的内容。研究方法创新。例如,利用“创头条”网站中“双创地图”的创业公司数量作为城市创业活跃度的衡量指标之一,更好地反映了城市创业质量;在衡量城市“数字创业”时,通过企业工商注册信息中包含的与数字经济相关的关键词,对“数字企业”进行识别,并建立城市数字创业水平的指标,对从企业进入这一新角度研究城市数字经济发展具有参考价值。研究观点创新。通过对城市宜居性与创新创业的关系进行理论探讨和实证检验,本研究明确了若干具有启发意义的观点,一是宜居城市建设和创新创业城市建设相得益彰,城市应将宜居城市建设作为“双创”城市建设的一项关键任务,加强以提升城市宜居品质为手段的引才政策;二是“宜居”与“宜业”在促进城市发展中是相互助力的关系,城市应协同推进二者的改善,以更好地推动城市创新创业和高质量发展;三是随着经济社会发展,宜居性对城市创新创业将更加重要,城市须更加重视城市宜居性建设的意义。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since entering the "new normal",a series of profound changes have taken place in China’s economy and society.The report of the 19 th National Congress of the Communist Party of China pointed out that "China’s economy has shifted from the phase of rapid growth to the phase of high-quality development",and "the principal contradiction facing Chinese society has evolved into the contradiction between unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life".Innovation is the primary driving force for high-quality development,and entrepreneurship is an extension of innovation.In particular,high-tech and highinnovative entrepreneurship not only relies on innovation,but also contributes to innovation,so innovation and entrepreneurship plays a key role in boosting highquality development.The transformation of the principal social contradiction shows that people’s requirements for the quality of life are increasingly higher and more comprehensive,people must also have higher requirements for the livable quality of the city,especially for high-quality talents.With the continuous expansion of the scale of population mobility in China and the continuous removal of mobility barriers,cross-city population migration is becoming more and more common.Whether cities can attract or retain talents related to innovation and entrepreneurship is of great significance to accelerate its high-quality development.Based on this,this research deeply discusses the relationship between livability and urban innovation and entrepreneurship,and provides useful reference for cities to improve livable quality,improve the vitality of innovation and entrepreneurship and accelerate highquality development.This paper firstly defines the relevant concepts,and then reviews the literature related to livability and innovation and entrepreneurship,and summarizes research fields that need to be improved.Secondly,the theoretical mechanism of livability promoting urban innovation and entrepreneurship is deeply analyzed,and the moderating effect mechanism of innovation institutional environment on livability affecting urban innovation,the moderating effect mechanism of entrepreneurial market environment on livability affecting entrepreneurship,and the spatial effect mechanism of livability promoting urban innovation and entrepreneurship are discussed.Thirdly,on the basis of establishing the evaluation index of urban livability,this research analyzes the fact of the spatial and temporal differences of urban livability in China,and compares the livability of major cities in China with that of foreign cities;Then,this research empirically examines the relationship between livability and urban innovation and entrepreneurship,as well as its corresponding moderating effect and spatial effect,and empirically analyzes the effect of livability on innovation quality,green innovation,digital entrepreneurship and other more specific issues related to high-quality development,and uses microdata to test the talent migration mechanism and vitality promotion mechanism of livability affecting innovation and entrepreneurship.Finally,according to the findings,the implications of this research is obtained,and policy suggestions are given on how to accelerate the improvement of urban livable quality.The major conclusions of this research are as follows.(1)By analyzing the temporal and spatial differences of Chinese cities’ livability,and comparing the gap between Chinese cities and world-class livable cities,it is found that the livability of Chinese cities has improved rapidly,but still lags far behind that of world-class livable cities,even representative cities such as Suzhou,Shanghai and Beijing are only at the medium level in the world.The livability gap between cities is obvious,and this gap has a widening trend.The livability gap between cities is mainly caused by the gap between regions,and the gap between high livable cities in the low livable region and low livable cities in the high livable region,while the gap within regions is relatively small.Metropolitan cities have a higher level of livability than non-metropolitan cities,especially in education,infrastructure,and healthcare;The livability of eastern cities is generally higher than that of central and western cities,especially in culture and environment,education,infrastructure,etc.,and the gap between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas,and between eastern cities and central and western cities is consistent with the direction of population flow and the concentration of innovative and entrepreneurial talents.The vitality of innovation and entrepreneurship of cities is in a phase of rapid improvement,but the gap between cities is obvious.There is an obvious gap in innovation and entrepreneurship between metropolitan areas and non-metropolitan areas,between eastern cities and central and western cities,which is also consistent with the gap in livability between cities,and the gap in entrepreneurial vitality between cities has a widening trend in recent years.The government does not pay enough attention to the improvement of livability,and the resulting obstacles such as insufficient improvement of livable conditions and imbalance of urban land resources supply limit the improvement of livable quality.(2)In the empirical test of the relationship between livability and urban innovation,this research finds that urban livability has a significant positive impact on innovation,and this impact is still valid after a series of robustness tests by using the indicator of the number of patents per capita,livability ranking and the alternative empirical models,and after the treatment of endogeneity.Livability not only has a positive impact on the scale of innovation,but also has a significant role in promoting the quality of urban innovation.The robustness test using alternative indicators also shows that livability has a positive impact on the upgrading of urban innovation ranking.The heterogeneity analysis finds that the promotion effect of livability on innovation is stronger after 2012,and it is more obvious in cities in the central and eastern regions,metropolitan areas,and in cities with high levels of human capital,cities with high levels of economic development,and cities with high proportion of tertiary industry,indicating that with the development of economy and society,the promotion effect of livability on innovation will become more prominent.The positive impact of urban livability on innovation increases with the optimization of the institutional environment for innovation.In "work-adaptable" cities with better intellectual property protection institution and more conducive to innovation,"livable" factors have a greater positive impact on innovation,indicating the complementary relationship between "livable" factor and "work-adaptable" factor in promoting innovation.The innovation promotion effect of urban livability has a spatial spillover effect,which is beneficial to the innovation of neighboring cities while driving local innovation;In addition,livability also plays a positive role in urban green technology innovation and green technology selection,especially for eastern cities.(3)In the empirical test of the relationship between livability and urban entrepreneurship,this research finds that urban livability has a significant positive effect on entrepreneurship,and this effect is still valid after a series of robustness tests and the treatment of endogeneity.The promotion effect of urban livability on entrepreneurship did not appear before 2012,but after 2012,its positive impact on entrepreneurship is more obvious in cities in the central and eastern regions,metropolitan areas,cities with high human capital level,service-oriented cities,cities with high economic level,and cities with high population density,indicating that with the development of economy and society,the positive effect of livability on entrepreneurship will appear.The promoting effect of livability on urban entrepreneurship is enhanced with the optimization of market environment for entrepreneurship.In "enterprise-adaptable" cities with higher marketization level and conducive to business operation,"livable" factors have a stronger promoting effect on entrepreneurship."Livable" factor and "enterprise-adaptable" factor are mutually reinforcing and complementary in promoting entrepreneurship.Livability not only has a positive effect on local entrepreneurship,but also promotes entrepreneurship in neighboring cities,which has a spatial spillover effect.In addition,it also has a positive impact on digital entrepreneurship activities,which reflects the positive significance of livable quality in the process of accelerating technological transformation and industrial upgrading in cities.(4)In the theoretical analysis part of this research,the micro-mechanism of livability affecting urban innovation and entrepreneurship is summarized as talent migration mechanism and vitality promotion mechanism,and the two are tested respectively in this research.When testing the talent migration mechanism,this research starts from the perspective of micro individual migration decision and macro aggregate migration scale.Based on the test of micro individual migration decision,it is found that livability can significantly promote the migration of talents needed for innovation and entrepreneurship,and talents with high human capital and entrepreneurship tend to migrate to cities with higher livability,and the positive role of livability in the immigration of talents with high human capital and entrepreneurial talents is significantly greater than that of the general population.As time goes by,the positive role of livability in the immigration decision of individuals has also increased,indicating that with the development of economy and society,people pay more and more attention to the livable conditions such as medical care,education,infrastructure,consumption,etc.Based on the test of macro aggregate migration scale,it is found that livability can help cities attract more immigrants,and promote the expansion of urban immigrant population and immigrant human capital scale,and has a greater positive effect on the expansion of the immigration scale of higher human capital individuals.When testing the talent vitality promotion mechanism,this study directly uses the micro data of innovators and entrepreneurs to analyze,and finds that the improvement of livability is conducive to the increase of innovation output of inventors,and also has a positive impact on individuals’ choice of entrepreneurship,which shows that livability can enhance the vitality of individual innovation and entrepreneurship.The principal innovations of this research are as follows.Innovation in perspectives.This research emphasizes the function of the city as a living space,and examines the impact of urban livability on innovation and entrepreneurship from the perspective of livability,and summarizes its micro mechanism as talent migration mechanism and vitality promotion mechanism,and uses micro data to test the corresponding mechanism,which helps to further improve the understanding of the role of urban livability.It is conducive to further expanding the understanding of the driving path of urban innovation and entrepreneurship,and provides more explicit incentives for cities to improve livable quality.Innovation in research content.Firstly,this research focuses on the impact of livability on urban entrepreneurship.Entrepreneurship is an extension of innovation,and its core is innovation.Both of them jointly reflect the "creativity" or "innovation" of cities,therefore,this work expands the research on the economic effects of livability in existing literature.Secondly,when investigating the impact of livability on urban innovation,this research further enriched the analysis of the effect of livability on innovation,including the impact of livability on the quality of urban innovation,the effect of livability on urban green technology innovation and green technology selection.Thirdly,the heterogeneity of the impact of livability on innovation and entrepreneurship in different periods,different regions and different types of cities is investigated from multiple perspectives,which provides empirical evidence for the conclusion that the role of livability will increase with the development of economy and society,and that cities should pay more attention to livable quality in the future.Fourthly,this research focuses on the moderating effect of institutional environment on the impact of livability on innovation,the moderating effect of market environment on the impact of livability on entrepreneurship,as well as the spatial effect of livability on innovation and entrepreneurship,which also expands the research on the role of urban livability and the influencing factors of innovation and entrepreneurship.Innovation in research method.For example,the number of startups on Entrepreneurship and Innovation Map in Ctoutiao is used as one of the indicators to measure the entrepreneurial activity in a city,which better reflects the quality of entrepreneurship in city.When measuring urban "digital entrepreneurship",it identifies "digital enterprises" through the keywords related to digital economy contained in the business registration information of enterprises,and establishes the index of urban digital entrepreneurship level,which has reference value for studying the development of urban digital economy from the new perspective of enterprise entry.Innovation in viewpoint.Through theoretical analysis and empirical test of the relationship between urban livability and innovation and entrepreneurship,this research identifies several enlightening points.First,the construction of livable cities and the construction of innovative and entrepreneurial cities complement each other.Cities should take the construction of livable cities as a key task in the construction of "innovation and entrepreneurship" city,and strengthen the policy of attracting talents by improving the livable quality of cities.Second,"livable" factor and "work-adaptable" or "enterprise-adaptable" factor are mutually supportive in promoting urban development.Cities should jointly promote the improvement of both to better promote urban innovation,entrepreneurship and high-quality development.Third,with the development of economy and society,livability will be more important to urban innovation and entrepreneurship.Cities should pay more attention to the significance of urban livability.更多还原