Innovation efficiency of semiconductor industry in China: A new framework based on generalized three-stage DEA analysis

Considering the interrelationships between periods and the influences of non-operational factors, a new framework based generalized three-stage DEA model, grey relational analysis theory and disparity disassembly model is proposed in this paper. Then, we measure the technical efficiency, scale efficiency, and pure technical efficiency of innovation in China's semiconductor industry between 2009 and 2014. In addition, we conducted projection analysis of the inputs to innovation and the disparities analysis in innovation efficiency across the industrial chain and within each segment. The results of our analyses reveal four key findings. The overall innovation efficiency of China's semiconductor industry is increasing; however, each segment of the industrial chain had different trends and different levels of innovation efficiency. All segments show a consistently upward trend except for package testing, which dipped in 2012 due to the time lag between the inputs and outputs associated with major technological advancements. The most efficient innovation is occurring in design and package testing, followed by manufacturing, materials, and equipment, in that order. Low levels of innovation efficiency were found to be the most significant factor restricting further improvement in the design, manufacturing, and equipment segments of the industrial chain. But the opposite is true for the package testing segment, where pure technical efficiency is the main factor. A range of redundancies in input were found across the industrial chain, mostly in manufacturing and equipment. These two segments are capital-intensive and characterized by a high level of technical complexity coupled with a long research cycle. The disparities in innovation efficiency in and between the segments decreased over the period. However, interestingly, the main disparities were found among the enterprises within each segment, which we attribute to the Chinese government's concerted efforts to support particular companies. Package testing and manufacturing had the highest levels of disparity due to relatively high agglomeration of these two segments. The materials segment had the lowest disparity, with equipment and design falling somewhere in-between.