创新型城市的综合评价研究

【作者】 刘元凤；

【导师】 陈家华；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 人口、资源与环境经济学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】关于指标体系形成和评价方法优化的讨论

【摘要】 在经历了三十年经济的高速增长之后,传统的经济增长方式已经面临着巨大的挑战：能源短缺、资源价格上涨、环境被污染破坏。因此,我们必须寻求新的经济增长方式,而创新是未来经济增长的源泉。我国现阶段的自主创新能力薄弱,自2006年胡锦涛主席提出建设创新型国家以来,各地纷纷提出了创新型城市建设的目标。创新型城市如何建设,从哪些方面来建设,这需要我们对城市的创新现状有一个清晰的了解,在建中的创新型城市也需要对建设进程进行监督,这些都要依靠综合评价来完成。本文的目的不在于评出具体哪个城市的创新能力高,哪个城市的创新能力低,而是要通过对创新型城市评价过程的分析,尤其是指标体系建立和评价方法运用环节的分析,透析每个环节对评价结果所产生的影响,希望能克服指标的随意性和评价方法的随意性所带来的评价结果的随意性,以期在过程合理的前提下,可以得到准确的评价结果,以免因结果偏差而对现实产生方向性的误导,这就背离了评价的初衷。在对国内外关于创新型城市的研究进行归纳和梳理的基础上,本文发现以往的创新型城市评价指标体系的建立,缺乏坚实的理论基础和固定的分析框架,指标体系多是根据主观经验得来,随意性强。本文建立了路径传导模型,并在此基础上构建了创新型城市的评价指标体系,试图克服指标体系的随意性。在对创新型城市的评价方法进行梳理时,本文发现大多数的评价是运用一种评价方法,并根据该方法的结果作出结论,而此方法在这里是否合适的论述却没有提及,这种评价方法选取的随意性会导致结果的随意性和不可靠。少数的评价者选用了两种及以上的方法,然而也只是对它们进行简单的比较,并没有得出一个最终的最优结果,也没有给出评价方案择优的路径,对于追求多目标的管理者来说,这样的结果难以取舍。本文运用了常规类、统计学类、运筹类和仿真类等八种算法,基于搜集到的三十个省市的关于创新方面的数据,进行了综合评价,并对每种方法的适用性进行了论述,然后,本文对这八个评价方案进行了择优,力图消除评价方法的随机性作用。改进了的兼容度差异度优化理论能吸收各种评价方案的优点,得出最接近真实的评价结果。与其他相关研究相比,本文有以下几点进步：(1)指标体系建立在坚实的理论和模型基础上。与以往的指标体系多基于经验而建立不同,本文中创新型城市的指标体系建立在路径传导模型的基础上,用模型对指标体系形成强制性的约束,克服了创新型城市的指标体系缺乏统一的理论基础和固定的分析框架、随机性大的问题,使指标体系中的每个指标都有了存在的理由和意义。(2)运用了多种评价方法进行数据合成,并详细讨论了每种方法的适用性。与以往关于评价的研究中多用一两种评价方法不同,本文分别用常规类、统计学类、运筹学类、仿真算法等共八种综合评价方法对创新型城市的建设状况进行了评价,并分析了各种方法在具体应用时的优缺点,使得我们对最终结果的看法更加客观,视角更加宽广。(3)增加了评价方案的优化环节。以往的研究中很少有评价方案优化的部分,然而我们却面对这样的问题：由多种评价方法得来的关于创新型城市的多个评价方案,是从中选择一种最优的方案,还是对其中的几种评价方案进行优化组合?哪种做法更好呢?本文共运用了序号总和理论、斯皮尔曼等级相关系数法、兼容度极大差异度极小法三种评价方案择优的理论,用实例证明了对多个评价方案进行合理的优化组合能得出最优的结果。(4)建立了最优的评价方案优化理论。论文发现了兼容度极大差异度极小化模型存在的问题,一是该模型难以实现的问题,对模型进行了修正,构建了严谨的模型实现步骤；二是提出了距离差异度的概念,把差异度区分为等级差异度和距离差异度,明确了在求兼容度极大差异度极小化模型时用到的差异度实际上为等级差异度,在各个评价方案择优时用到的是距离差异度,无论在计算方法还是内涵上,等级差异度都有别于距离差异度。改进后的兼容度差异度择优模型能吸收各种评价方案的优点,得出最客观的结果。对创新型城市的建设状况进行评价,并不是只要有指标体系和评价方法就可以了。指标体系必须建立在对创新型城市的内涵准确把握的基础上,在现实情况允许的情况下,要尽量多选用几种评价方法,然后在此基础上根据改进的兼容度差异度理论构建最优的评价方案,只有这样,才能得出客观公正的结果,也才能对现实进行正确的指导。更多还原

【Abstract】 After thirty years high economic growth in China, the traditional growth pattern has already been challenged by energy shortage, rise in resource price and environmental pollution, so we have to find a new way out, and innovation is the root of future growth. At present, the self-innovation capability in our country is still frail. Many cities have set the goal of constructing innovative city in future after the concept of innovative country construction was brought up by Chairman Hu Jintao. Then how can we build up an innovative city? Basically, we need to be very familiar of the city’s innovative capability. Cities on the way to innovation also have the needs to know where they are. All of these call for the comprehensive evaluation of innovative city.We don’t aim at a result of city rank in innovation capability, but hope to know clearly the influence of every step in evaluation on the final result throught analysis of the estimation process, especially the build of indices and the choice of evaluation method, so that we can overcome the randomness of the final result originated from it. If the result is not able to reflect the truth, it will mislead the policy decision, which is contrary to the original intention of evaluation.On the basis of literature review on innovative city research, we find that former indicator system was not firmly built on theory and the universally acknowledged analysis structure has not been formed yet. Most of the indices were based on personal experience and they have some kind of randomness. In order to overcome the weakness, we have established the pathway model of innovative city, on the basis of which the indicator system is constructed.The literature review of innovative research also reveals that former study just used one evaluation method to form the conclusion without appraisal of the method adaptability. The casual attitude towards the method choice will make the result unreliable. Very few studies use two or more methods, however, they don’t provide a final conclusion or the way to it. For managers pursuing multi-objectives, it is hard to make the choice. In the study, based on the innovation data of thirty cities in China, we use eight kinds of method to do the evaluation and we also talk about the adaptability here of each method. Then, we go on to find a best resolution based on the eight methods. The improved compatibility&difference theory is the most suitable theory in decision making.Compared with other studies, this essay has several improvements listed below:(1)Indicator system is based firmly on innovation theory.Different from fomer indices built on experience, ours are constructed according to pathway model. It overcomes the weakness of frail theoretical basis and unfixed analysis structure which often lead to randomness in indicators forming, so that every index has its reason to be there.(2)Several data synthesis methods are used in the study and their adaptability here is discussed. Different from other studies which use just one or two methods, this paper uses eight kinds of methods to synthesize the innovation data, and we also talks about the adaptability of them, which gives us a new way of comprehending the final result. (3)The step of methods optimization is added here, which is seldom included in other studies. However, we face the problem of making an exclusive decision from the eight programs. How can we do? To choose one or to form a new one? In the study, we have used three theories to make the decision, and it proves that the suitable decision is made upon forming a new resolution based on the eight programs.(4)The best optimization theory of programs is established. The study has found the problem of compatibility&difference theory and made improvements. The improved compatibility&difference theory could absorb the advantages of several methods, so that it can provide a objective result.Indicator system and evaluation methods are not enough for the evaluation of innovative city. The indices should be based on precise appreciation of innovation city. If possible, we’d better use several methods, then we can reach a final conclusion using improved compatibility&difference theory. Only so, the result will be objective and accurate, and could be used efficiently in policy making.更多还原