LIU Wei, LV Peng, DONG Ya-ning
Spatial imbalance in urban innovation has become a critical bottleneck constraining the construction of an innovation-oriented country, and a single research perspective is insufficient to identify the driving forces of urban innovation in the digital economy era. Based on the panel data of 283 prefecture-level cities in China from 2011 to 2023, this paper empirically investigates the interactive effect of the digital economy and public services on urban innovation. The results show that, first, the digital economy and public services form a mutually complementary virtuous cycle that jointly promotes urban innovation. Specifically, three types of public services (medical care, education, and transportation infrastructure) exert both direct innovation-promoting effects and synergistic amplification effects. Second, the synergistic innovation effect presents significant heterogeneity across regions and administrative levels. In terms of regional heterogeneity, the synergistic effect between the digital economy and medical services is significant in eastern and central cities, while western cities can release innovation dividends through the dual coordination of medical care and transportation infrastructure. In terms of administrative hierarchy, provincial capitals and municipalities mainly rely on the synergy between the digital economy and transportation infrastructure, whereas ordinary prefecture-level cities depend on the coordination of digital economy, medical care, and education services. Third, public services impose differentiated threshold constraints on the innovation empowerment of the digital economy. Medical and transportation services show a double-threshold feature, and the innovation effect of the digital economy decreases with the improvement of public service levels. By contrast, education services present no significant threshold effect and exert weak nonlinear constraints on digital innovation. This study provides empirical evidence and policy references for alleviating regional innovation imbalance, implementing differentiated innovation support policies, and promoting the cross-regional sharing and optimal allocation of high-quality public resources.