A Study on Construction of Taiwan’s Local Innovation Indicators

• Main Authors: Shu-Jiuan Sung, 宋淑娟
• Other Authors: Yi-Chiang Chou
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2011
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/41078142843755517957

碩士 === 逢甲大學 === 都市計畫所 === 99 === Under the background of knowledge economy and globalization, there had been a significant change in the economic environment and industry structure of the world. The cost of production elements, especially that of labor and land, was soaring. It became an inevitable trend for Taiwan to transform into knowledge-intensive industry which was high value added due to competition from nearby countries. The study was analyzed with a literature review and data from twenty-three counties and cities in Taiwan. The origin of innovation theory and the history of innovative urban development helped comprehend the relation between innovation and city competition. The features of innovative countries and cities were also integrated to discuss important elements which influenced cities. Along with the principle of selection, the variables of measuring the innovation capabilities of 23 counties and cities in Taiwan were selected to construct the innovation indictors for counties and cities in Taiwan. The 23 countries and cities were ranked and divided into number of clusters based on the indicators to comprehend the innovation level and clusters of each county and city in Taiwan. The study results were as follows: I. The study utilized factor analysis approach to extract the five potential factors which influenced the innovation capabilities of counties and cities in Taiwan. The five factors included: “knowledge creation and efficacy,” “innovation foundation,” “fundamental environment,” “transfer of industry structure” and “pursue of new knowledge.” They were used to construct the framework of innovation indicators in Taiwan. II. The study utilized principal component analysis approach to extract the overall index of innovation capabilities of counties and cities in Taiwan. The 23 counties and cities were ranked with overall index score to know their rankings in Taiwan. The top five were Taipei City, Taipei County, Hsinchu City, Taichung City and Kaohsiung City. In the factor of “knowledge creation and efficacy,” the overall index score of Taipei City was far higher than other counties and cities. This meant that knowledge creation and flow were mainly in Taipei City. III. In the factor of “innovation foundation,” the construct of the first eleven counties and cities had no great differences, which showed that the infrastructure of each county and city in Taiwan had reached the same level. IV. In the factor of “fundamental environment,” Penghu County and Hualien County ranked the second and fourth respectively, while Taipei City and Hsinchu City were the fifteenth and sixteenth respectively. The result implied that infrastructure in over-populated regions might not satisfy every single person. V. In the factor of “transfer of industry structure,” except that the score of Hsinchu City, the top one, was much higher than other counties and cities, the construct of the other first eleven counties and cities had no great difference. This showed that, in Taiwan, the industry structure and development had switched to non-traditional industries. VI. The aspect of “new knowledge pursue” had a negative correlation with other four factors. At present, the personal computer penetration rate and Internet-surfing rate both reached 65% in almost every county or city in Taiwan. The fact hinted that the higher the innovation level of a city was and the more widespread of Internet information was, the more likely it was for the approach of pursuing new knowledge to be changed from physical media to virtual electronic information. VII. Highly and high-intermediate innovative counties and cities were chiefly in northern Taiwan or were municipalities. However, less innovative regions were principally in remote areas where their main industry was agriculture. The indicator of innovative cities emphasized on the innovation of knowledge and unconventional industries. From cluster analysis, less innovative regions should have been excluded from the rankings of innovative cities whose industries were mostly knowledge-based.