乡村振兴背景下我国农林高校的科研效率及影响因素

Scientific Research Efficiency and Influencing Factors of China’s Agricultural and Forestry Universities Under the Background of Rural Revitalization

摘要:

鉴于目前对我国农林高校科研效率影响因素、各高校内部科研效率差异和动静态效率情况分析不足，基于乡村振兴背景，选取我国29所农林高校为研究对象，首先运用DEA模型与Malmquist指数从静态和动态两方面进行科研效率评价，结果发现：就静态来看，农林高校整体科研效率水平较高但各高校之间尚存在较大差距，“双一流”建设农林高校高于普通农林高校，东部农林高校最高、西部次之、中部最低；就动态来看，农林高校全要素生产率呈现逐年增长态势，但科研创新与技术进步方面仍需加强，办学层次上“双一流”建设农林高校未来继续领跑，地区分类上东部农林高校与西部农林高校的差距将进一步缩小、与中部农林高校的差距将进一步扩大。进一步运用Tobit模型分析发现，人力投入、科研机构数量与国家重点学科数量对农林高校科研效率呈显著的正相关，经费投入则呈显著的负相关，高层次人才数量和所在省份人均生产总值虽与农林高校科研效率呈正相关但未通过显著性检验。

Abstract:

Considering the lack of analysis on the influencing factors, internal efficiency differences as well as dynamic and static efficiency of agricultural and forestry universities in China, the scientific research efficiency of 29 agricultural and forestry universities in China is evaluated from both static and dynamic aspects by using DEA model and Malmquist index under the background of rural revitalization. From the static point of view, although the overall scientific research efficiency level of agricultural and forestry universities in China is high, the scientific research efficiency of double first class universities is higher than that of other ordinary universities. The overall scientific research efficiency of agricultural and forestry universities in the east China is the highest, followed by the west, and the lowest in the central region. From the dynamic aspects, the total factor productivity of agricultural and forestry colleges and universities is increasing year by year, but the scientific research innovation and technological progress still need to be strengthened. The scientific research efficiency of double first-class universities will continue to take the lead in the future. The gap between the eastern and western universities will be further narrowed, while the universities in central China will further lag behind. Subsequently, by the means of Tobit model, it is found that the manpower input, amount of scientific research institutions, as well as quantity of national key disciplines positively correlate with scientific research efficiency, while the investment of funds is significantly negatively correlated. Although both qualities of high-level talents and the per capital GDP of the provinces positively correlate with scientific research efficiency, they fail the significance test.