主管单位:中国科学技术协会
主办单位:中国地理学会
承办单位:华东师范大学

世界地理研究 ›› 2023, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (5): 1-17.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2023.05.20220352

• 世界政治与经济 •    

全球城市生产性服务业网络与科研合作网络的结构差异与内在机制

曹湛1,2(), 李迎成3(), 戴靓4   

  1. 1.同济大学建筑与城市规划学院,上海 200092
    2.自然资源部国土空间智能规划技术重点实验室,上海 200092
    3.东南大学建筑学院,南京 210096
    4.南京财经大学公共管理学院,南京 210023
  • 收稿日期:2022-05-17 修回日期:2022-09-05 出版日期:2023-05-15 发布日期:2023-06-09
  • 通讯作者: 李迎成
  • 作者简介:曹湛(1989—),男,博士,助理教授,主要从事城市网络和创新网络研究,E-mail:1989caozhan@tongji.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(52008298);上海市科委软科学项目(23692116700)

The structural differences and mechanisms of global interurban producer services network and scientific collaboration network

Zhan CAO1,2(), Yingcheng LI3(), Liang DAI4   

  1. 1.College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    2.Key Laboratory of Spatial Intelligent Planning Technology, Ministry of Natural Resources of the People's Republic of China, Shanghai 200092, China
    3.College of Architecture, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
    4.School of Public Administration, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Nanjing 210023, China
  • Received:2022-05-17 Revised:2022-09-05 Online:2023-05-15 Published:2023-06-09
  • Contact: Yingcheng LI

摘要:

除了经济本底、区位条件和基础设施等自身禀赋外,城市在全球化进程中的持续竞争力一方面取决于其在全球资本体系中的支配力,另一方面也取决于其在创新网络中的控制力。利用高端生产性服务企业总部-分支数据和Web of Science合著论文数据,分别构建了全球城市生产性服务业网络和全球城市科研合作网络,并对比了两种网络的结构差异,探讨了形成差异的内在机制。研究发现:①空间结构方面,两种网络均呈现出明显的“南-北”分化和“东-西”差距。生产性服务业网络中的顶级城市比科研合作网络中的顶级城市空间分布更为广阔。②拓扑结构方面,生产性服务业网络的总体网络连通性比科研合作网络更高。两种网络均具有小世界性和无标度性,也呈现出明显的“社群”结构和“中心-腹地”结构,但组织形式有所不同。③生产性服务业与科研合作实践逻辑的不同是造成两种城市网络结构差异的内在机制。

关键词: 全球城市, 生产性服务业网络, 科研合作网络, 结构差异, 内在机制

Abstract:

In addition to endowments such as economic bases, locations and infrastructures, the sustained competitiveness of cities in the process of globalization depends on their dominance in the global production and capital system on the one hand, and their technological innovation ability on the other hand. Based on the data of headquarter-branch of advanced producer services firms and the co-publication data from the Web of Science, the study constructs a Global Interurban Producer Services Network (GPSN) and a Global Interurban Scientific Collaboration Network (GSCN), further compares their structural differences and impact factors. The results show: ① In terms of spatial structures, there are clear-cut 'South-North' divide and 'East-West' gap in both networks with highly connected cities concentrated in Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific. The spatial distribution of network connectivity of top cities in the GPSN is flatter than that in the GSCN. ② In terms of topological features, cities in the GPSN are more interconnected than in the GSCN. Small-world and scale-free properties can be found in both networks. The two networks both present identifiable community structures and 'center-hinterlands' structures but with different organization patterns. ③ The differences in practice logic between producer services and scientific collaboration are responsible for their structural differences in the global interurban networks.

Key words: global cities, producer services network, scientific collaboration network, structural differences, internal mechanisms