從首台套政策看中國科技創新的央地差異

Abstract

面對全球科技競爭與產業升級壓力，中國自2009年起推動《首台（套）重大技術裝備推廣應用政策》，透過財政補貼、保險補償與政府採購等手段，鼓勵企業突破關鍵技術瓶頸、提升裝備自主化，進而促進產業鏈協同與高端製造發展。隨著政策逐步制度化，地方政府亦推出省級版本，形成中央與地方多層級並行的政策格局。本研究聚焦比較國家與省級首台套政策在技術領域選擇、產業分布及政策導向上的異同。透過整理2015、2017、2019及2024年四期國家名單，結合2024年浙江、江蘇、山東、廣東四省名單，運用描述性統計與量化分析，解析中央政策的技術戰略邏輯與地方因地制宜的特徵。研究結果顯示，國家政策呈由普惠轉向聚焦的調整趨勢，2024年更顯著轉向重點產業；省級政策則兼具地方特色與對中央導向的追隨，亦存在一定同質化傾向。政策支持與產業營收規模具正向關聯，顯示政府資源配置日益重視產業效益；部分省份政策尚處探索階段，產業選擇偏好未明確。本研究揭示中國首台套政策的中央統籌與地方調整並行機制，為理解產業政策的區域差異與動態調整提供實證參考。Facing global technological competition and industrial upgrading pressures, China has promoted the First Set of Major Technical Equipment Application Policy since 2009. Through financial subsidies, insurance compensation, and government procurement, the policy encourages enterprises to overcome key technical bottlenecks and enhance equipment localization, thereby fostering industrial chain coordination and high-end manufacturing development. As the policy became institutionalized, provincial governments also introduced local versions, forming a multi-level system involving both central and local governments.This study compares national and provincial “First Set” policies in terms of technology selection, industry distribution, and policy orientation. It analyzes the 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2024 national catalogs along with the 2024 catalogs of Zhejiang, Jiangsu, Shandong, and Guangdong provinces, using descriptive statistics and quantitative analysis to explore the central strategic logic and local adaptive features.The results show a shift in national policy from broad-based to focused support, with the 2024 list emphasizing key industries. Provincial policies exhibit local characteristics while also following central priorities, leading to some homogenization. A positive correlation is found between policy support and industry revenue, indicating a growing emphasis on industrial performance in resource allocation. Some provinces remain in exploratory stages, with unclear preferences in industry selection. This study reveals a dual model of centralized coordination and local adjustment, offering empirical insights into regional policy variation and dynamic adaptation.