Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40354469›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Government regulation or market mechanism? A study on the collaborative innovation pathways of the emergency industry based on evolutionary game models.

Xinpu Zhang, Hongbo Li, Qi Kang, Lewei Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Xinpu ZhangSchool of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3306-8648
Hongbo LiSchool of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.
Qi KangChina Institute for Agricultural Equipment Industrial Development, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5407-5556
Lewei ChenSchool of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Promoting collaborative innovation within the emergency industry has become a crucial task, which is of great significance for enhancing emergency response capabilities and ensuring public safety. On the basis of considering the economic attributes of the emergency industry and the uncertainty characteristics of market returns, this study constructs an evolutionary game model for collaborative innovation among emergency enterprises, universities and research institutions (UR), and government departments, which are the main entities considered. It analyzes the evolutionary process of the strategy choices and equilibrium states of different entities, thereby revealing the key factors and intrinsic mechanisms affecting collaborative innovation pathways. The study results indicate that the economic attributes of the emergency industry and the uncertainty of market returns are key factors that constrain the collaborative innovation and development of the emergency industry. The economic attributes of the emergency industry determine the applicable boundaries of government regulation and market mechanisms in the collaborative innovation process of the emergency industry. Due to the "marketization paradox" in the emergency industry with weak economic attributes, and the fact that emergency enterprises and UR are more likely to face the "prisoner's dilemma" in the process of collaborative innovation, collaborative innovation via the government regulation-driven pathway is more feasible; In contrast, for the emergency industry with strong economic attributes, the government can effectively strengthen the market-oriented profit mechanism by enhancing public safety emergency awareness, thereby promoting collaborative innovation driven by market mechanisms in the emergency industry. Based on the analysis of the effects of different regulatory measures, it is found that government procurement is more effective than R&D subsidy policy. R&D subsidies are not only ineffective in avoiding the "prisoner's dilemma" in the collaborative innovation process, but also have a "double-edged sword" effect. Excessive subsidy intensity can actually inhibit the enthusiasm of emergency enterprises and UR for collaborative innovation. When government departments adopt regulatory actions, focusing on balancing incentive and punitive measures, and emergency enterprises and UR focus on establishing a reasonable benefit distribution mechanism, which can more effectively improve the efficiency of collaborative innovation and form a good situation of win-win for all parties. The above findings provide certain decision-making references for the promotion of innovative development in the emergency industry.

Indexed as

EmergenciesGame TheoryGovernment RegulationIndustryCooperative BehaviorHumans

Identifiers

PMID40354469
PMCPMC12068739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.