The Impact of Cross-border M&As on Export Product Quality from the Perspective of Reverse Technology Spillover
Zhou Liming1, Liu Kaikai2, Meng Xing3, Wang Zheng4,5
1.School of Economics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 2.Zhejiang Fuzhe Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou 311000, China 3.Business School, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China 4.School of Economics, Guangzhou College of Commerce, Guangzhou 511363, China 5.School of Business, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 4HN, U. K.
Abstract：In the contemporary era marked by rising global economic uncertainties and intensifying anti-globalization trends, enhancing the international competitiveness of manufacturing enterprises through strategic initiatives has become a critical issue. One such initiative is cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&A), which have been identified as a potent tool for upgrading the quality of export products. The central research question revolves around identifying effective strategies for leveraging cross-border M&A to enhance the quality of export products amidst an uncertain global economic landscape. Previous studies have predominantly focused on macro-level analyses or specific industry cases, leaving a void in understanding the micro-level impacts and mechanisms of cross-border M&A on export product quality. By constructing a comprehensive theoretical framework linking cross-border M&A, reverse technology spillovers, and export product quality, this research seeks to fill that gap.The theory of technology spillovers provides a foundational basis for exploring the technological acquisition paths facilitated by cross-border M&A. Prior research has extensively discussed the pathways of reverse technology spillovers, corporate absorption capacity, integration capabilities, and the evaluation of technology spillover effects. However, there remains a paucity of empirical studies at the micro level, particularly concerning the mechanism of action impacting export product quality. This paper addresses these inadequacies by integrating multiple dimensions—technological acquisition, transformation, and integration—into a cohesive analytical framework.To analyze the impact of cross-border M&A on export product quality, a three-stage model was constructed. This model encompasses stages of technology acquisition, conversion, and integration, aiming to elucidate how enterprises can harness advanced technologies, equipment, and talents acquired through M&A activities to improve their export product quality. Empirical analysis utilized Propensity Score Matching (PSM) and multi-period Difference-in-Differences (DID) methods to estimate causal effects.Baseline regression results indicated a significant positive relationship between cross-border M&A and the quality of export products. Even after controlling for various factors, the positive impact remained evident, suggesting that cross-border M&A substantially enhances export product quality. Dynamic effect analysis revealed a one-year lag period before the full benefits of cross-border M&A became apparent, highlighting the need for time and investment in integrating acquired resources. Heterogeneity tests further demonstrated that same-industry acquisitions, particularly those involving electronics and communication equipment manufacturing, and acquisitions of target companies holding patent grants, exhibited more pronounced positive effects on export product quality.Reverse technology spillover effects were confirmed to positively influence export product quality. Enterprises acquiring advanced technologies, equipment, and talents through cross-border M&A could effectively transfer these assets back to the parent company, leading to significant improvements in product quality. Additionally, the study found that firms with stronger absorption and integration capabilities benefited more from reverse technology spillovers. Absorption capabilities enabled firms to efficiently utilize the technological resources of acquired companies, facilitating technology diffusion and enhancing product quality and economic benefits. Integration capabilities, on the other hand, allowed for deeper exploitation of innovative resources, further promoting technology diffusion and improving product quality and economic performance.A detailed case study of Junsheng Electronics illustrated the practical implications of the theoretical findings. Through the acquisition of KSS in the USA and TS in Germany, Junsheng integrated high-quality R&D resources from five centers, significantly boosting its independent R&D capabilities and the quality of its export products. After the acquisition, the firm achieved notable improvements across R&D, production, and sales stages, including increased R&D investment, growth in technical patents, optimized production efficiency, and enhanced international market competitiveness. This case exemplifies the transformative potential of cross-border M&A in elevating export product quality and overall business performance.This study concludes that cross-border M&A significantly enhances the quality of export products, with lasting effects observed over time. Intellectual property-intensive acquisitions within the same industry yield particularly pronounced benefits. Reverse technology spillover effects are crucial in this process, with strong absorption and integration capabilities amplifying these effects. The findings offer valuable insights for policymakers and business practitioners, contributing to a better understanding of China’s manufacturing technology upgrade paths and strategies for enhancing global competitiveness. Future research should continue to explore the nuanced mechanisms and broader implications of cross-border M&A, providing actionable recommendations for stakeholders seeking to leverage these strategic initiatives effectively.
周黎明, 刘开恺, 孟醒, 王争. 逆向技术溢出视角下跨国并购对企业出口产品质量的影响[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2026, 56(8): 5-28.
Zhou Liming, Liu Kaikai, Meng Xing, Wang Zheng. The Impact of Cross-border M&As on Export Product Quality from the Perspective of Reverse Technology Spillover. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2026, 56(8): 5-28.
1 Macdougall G.， “The benefits and costs of private investment from abroad： a theoretical approach，” The Economic Record， Vol. 36 （1960）， pp. 13-35. 2 Grossman G. M. & Helpman E.， “Trade， knowledge spillovers， and growth，” European Economic Review， Vol. 35， No. 2-3 （1991）， pp. 517-526. 3 李梅、柳士昌：《对外直接投资逆向技术溢出的地区差异和门槛效应——基于中国省际面板数据的门槛回归分析》，《管理世界》2012年第1期，第21-32页。 4 蒋冠宏、蒋殿春：《中国工业企业对外直接投资与企业生产率进步》，《世界经济》2014年第9期，第55-76页。 5 崔新健、章东明：《跨国研发中心逆向技术流动绩效的影响因素——基于系统动力学的建模与仿真研究》，《南开管理评论》2020年第23卷第3期，第109-120页。 6 de Bondt R. & Henriques I.， “Strategic investment with asymmetric spillovers，” Canadian Journal of Economics， Vol. 28， No. 3 （1995）， pp. 656-674. 7 Griffith R.， Harrison R. & van Reenen J.， “How special is the special relationship？ using the impact of US R&D spillovers on UK firms as a test of technology sourcing，” American Economic Review， Vol. 96， No. 5 （2006）， pp. 1859-1875. 8 Dyer W. G.， “Examining the ‘family effect’ on firm performance，” Family Business Review， Vol. 19， No. 4 （2006）， pp. 253-273. 9 张峥、高明明、陈清生：《技术相似度对中国制造业并购创新绩效影响模拟》，《科技进步与对策》2016年第19期，第69-75页。 10 Capron L.， “The long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions，” Strategic Management Journal， Vol. 20， No. 11 （1999）， pp. 987-1018. 11 Barney J.， “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage，” Journal of Management， Vol. 17， No. 1 （1991）， pp. 99-120. 12 McCarthy K. J. & Aalbers H. L.， “Technological acquisitions： the impact of geography on post-acquisition innovative performance，” Research Policy， Vol. 45， No. 9 （2016）， pp. 1818-1832. 13 Stiebale J. & Reize F.， “The impact of FDI through mergers and acquisitions on innovation in target firms，” International Journal of Industrial Organization， Vol. 29， No. 2 （2011）， pp. 155-167. 14 郭飞、黄雅金：《全球价值链视角下OFDI逆向技术溢出效应的传导机制研究——以华为技术有限公司为例》，《管理学刊》2012年第3期，第61-65页。 15 苏汝劼、李玲：《制造业对外直接投资的逆向技术溢出效应——基于技术差距的影响分析》，《宏观经济研究》2021年第7期，第66-78页。 16 付海燕：《对外直接投资逆向技术溢出效应研究——基于发展中国家和地区的实证检验》，《世界经济研究》2014年第9期，第56-61，67，88-89页。 17 Buckley P.， Cross A. & Tan H.， “Historic and emergent trends in chinese outward direct investment，” Management International Review， Vol. 48， No. 6 （2008）， pp. 715-747. 18 赵剑波、吕铁：《中国企业如何从“逆向并购”到“逆向吸收”？——以工程机械制造业跨国并购为例》，《经济管理》2016年第7期，第35-47页。 19 王诗翔、魏江、路瑶：《跨国技术并购中吸收能力与技术绩效关系研究——基于演化博弈论》，《科学学研究》2014年第12期，第1828-1835页。 20 钱锡红、杨永福、徐万里：《企业网络位置、吸收能力与创新绩效——一个交互效应模型》，《管理世界》2010年第5期，第118-129页。 21 Lessard D.， Teece D. J. & Leih S.， “The dynamic capabilities of meta-multinationals，” Global Strategy Journal， Vol. 6， No. 3 （2016）， pp. 211-224. 22 Helfat C. E. & Peteraf M. A.， “The dynamic resource-based view： capability lifecycles，” Strategic Management Journal， Vol. 17， No. 3 （2003）， pp. 268-283. 23 Bauer F.， Matzler K. & Wolf S.， “M&A and innovation： the role of integration and cultural differences—a central European targets perspective，” International Business Review， Vol. 25， No. 1 （2016）， pp. 76-86. 24 余静文、彭红枫、李濛西：《对外直接投资与出口产品质量升级：来自中国的经验证据》，《世界经济》2021年第1期，第54-80页。 25 Khandelwal A. K.， Schott P. K. & Wei S. J.， “Trade liberalization and embedded institutional reform： evidence from Chinese exporters，” American Economic Review， Vol. 103， No. 6 （2013）， pp. 2169-2195. 26 施炳展、邵文波：《中国企业出口产品质量测算及其决定因素——培育出口竞争新优势的微观视角》，《管理世界》2014年第9期，第90-106页。 27 王喆、蒋殿春：《跨国并购是否提高了企业风险：来自中国上市公司的证据》，《世界经济研究》2021年第3期，第107-120页。 28 Yu P.， Hao R. & Cai Z.， “Does emission trading system achieve the win-win of carbon emission reduction and financial performance improvement？ evidence from Chinese A-share listed firms in industrial sector，” Journal of Cleaner Production， Vol. 333 （2022）， https：//doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130121. 29 施炳展、王有鑫、李坤望：《中国出口产品品质测度及其决定因素》，《世界经济》2013年第9期，第69-93页。 30 祝树金、申志轩、段凡：《数字化转型能提升企业出口产品质量吗》，《经济学动态》2023年第11期，第72-87页。 31 吕越、陈帅、盛斌：《嵌入全球价值链会导致中国制造的“低端锁定”吗？》，《管理世界》2018年第8期，第11-29页。 32 冼国明、明秀南：《海外并购与企业创新》，《金融研究》2018年第8期，第155-171页。 33 Rosenbaum P. R. & Rubin D. B.， “Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score，” The American Statistician， Vol. 39， No. 1 （1985）， pp. 33-38. 34 任胜钢、郑晶晶、刘东华等：《排污权交易机制是否提高了企业全要素生产率——来自中国上市公司的证据》，《中国工业经济》2019年第5期，第5-23页。 35 Flam H. & Helpman E.， “Vertical product differentiation and North-South trade，” American Economic Review， Vol. 77， No. 5 （1987）， pp. 810-822. 36 赵昌文、卢中伟、杜江：《专利能提升企业价值吗？——基于中国创业板的数据分析》，《经济体制改革》2023年第1期，第108-116页。 37 Trajtenberg M.， “A penny for your quotes： patent citations and the value of innovations，” The RAND Journal of Economics， Vol. 21， No. 1 （1990）， pp. 172-187. 38 Lucas R. E.， “On the mechanics of economic development，” Journal of Monetary Economics， Vol. 22， No. 1 （1988）， pp. 3-42. 39 江艇：《因果推断经验研究中的中介效应与调节效应》，《中国工业经济》2022年第5期，第100-120页。 40 Liu L.， Zhao Z. & Zhang M. et al.， “The effects of environmental regulation on outward foreign direct investment’s reverse green technology spillover： crowding out or facilitation？” Journal of Cleaner Production， Vol. 284 （2021）， https：//doi.org/1016/j.jclepro.2020.124689. 41 Huang K. F.， Lin K. H. & Wu L. Y.， “Absorptive capacity and autonomous R&D climate roles in firm innovation，” Journal of Business Research， Vol. 68， No. 1 （2015）， pp. 87-94. 42 Kapoor R. & Lim K.， “The impact of acquisitions on the productivity of inventors at semiconductor firms： a synthesis of knowledge-based and incentive-based perspectives，” Academy of Management Journal， Vol. 50， No. 5 （2007）， pp. 1133-1155.
2026, Vol. 56 
