The impact of the Digital Environment and Research Staff Potential on Regional Innovation Dynamics, Considering Complementarity Constraints and Nonlinear Effects

Study topic: Regional asymmetry and structural constraints in Russian Federation regions and their impact on the digital environment, research staff potential, and innovation output. The work’s goal: To empirically evaluate how the digital environment and research staff capabilities influence the conversion of innovation spending into innovationresults, while also examining if digitalization’s effect on regional innovation is non-linear. The methodology is rooted in the principle of complementary assets. The empirical basis is Rosstat data for 75 constituent entities of the Russian Federation for 2014–2024. The analysis involves a linear panel model with fixed regional and year dummy effects, alongside a random effects model for comparative analysis. To justify model selection and diagnose multicollinearity and cross- sectional dependence, the Breusch–Pagan, Hausman, VIF, and Pesaran tests are utilized. The results indicate that the impact of linear moderation from the digital environment and research staff potential on innovation expenditure —  output is not statistically significant in any of the analyzed scenarios. The authors see this as proof that the linear complementary assets concept has restricted use in Russia’s regions. The study confirms a U-shaped link between the digital environment and innovation output: The digital environment index’s linear and quadratic terms show positive and significant coefficients, indicating that returns grow after a key level of digital maturity is attained. The consistent negative impact of fixed capital investment is understood as innovation activity being displaced by investment, especially in resource- and capital- intensive sectors. The positive impact of the gross regional product (GRP) per capita confirms the role of economic development, but does not compensate for structural limitations. The scientific contribution of this study is the simultaneous testing of the moderating and nonlinear effects of the digital environment and research human resources on panel data from Russian regions over an extended period, including the interpretation of statistically insignificant moderating results as meaningful evidence of the contextual dependence of complementary assets rather than as a methodological artifact. It also interprets non-significant moderation findings as substantive proof of complementary assets’ context dependency, not as a methodological flaw. The findings lay the groundwork for continued investigation into digitalization’s threshold effects, spatial knowledge spillovers, and how effects vary across different regional innovation systems. The study’s practical value lies in supporting a varied regional innovation strategy. For areas with low digital development, the focus should be on reaching a basic infrastructure level. Conversely, regions with strong resource specialization need to shift investments towards technological renewal, R&D, and high-tech services.

1. Teece D. J. Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy. 1986;15(6):285-305. DOI: 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2

2. Radicic D., Petkovic S. Impact of digitalization on technological innovations in small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs). Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2023;191:122474. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122474

3. Huang J., Balezentis T., Shen S., Streimikiene D. Human capital mismatch and innovation performance in hightechnology enterprises: An analysis based on the micro- level perspective. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2023;8(4):100452. DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2023.100452

4. Li Y., Zhu Z., Gao S. Research on the impact of regional digitalization on innovation performance and its boundary conditions: An empirical study based on Chinese provincial panel data. SAGE Open. 2025;15(2):21582440241303223. DOI: 10.1177/21582440241303223

5. Du Z.-Y., Wang Q. Digital Infrastructure and Innovation: Digital Divide or Digital Dividend? Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2024;9(3):100542. DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2024.100542

6. Han Y., Li Z., Feng T., Qiu S., Hu J., Yadav K. K., Obaidullah A. J. Unraveling the impact of digital transformation on green innovation through microdata and machine learning. Journal of Environmental Management. 2024;354:120271. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120271

7. Zhang X., Wu X., Zhou W., Fu N. Research on the green innovation effect of digital economy network — Empirical evidence from the manufacturing industry in the Yangtze River Delta. Environmental Technology & Innovation. 2024;34:103595. DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2024.103595

8. Hauser C., Siller M., Schatzer T., Walde J., Tappeiner G. Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2018;129(С):43-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.019

9. Rudskaya I., Kryzhko D., Shvediani A., Missler- Behr M. Regional Open Innovation Systems in a Transition Economy: A Two- Stage DEA Model to Estimate Effectiveness. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022;8(1):41. DOI: 10.3390/joitmc8010041

10. Zemtsov S., Muradov A., Wade I., Barinova V. Determinants of regional innovation in Russia: Are people or capital more important? Foresight and STI Governance. 2016;10(2):29-42. DOI: 10.17323/1995-459X.2016.2.29.42

11. Aldieri L., Kotsemir M., Vinci C. P. Knowledge spillover effects: Empirical evidence from Russian regions. Quality & Quantity. 2018;52(5):2111-2132. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-017-0624-2

12. Rodionov D., Velichenkova D. Relation between Russian universities and regional innovation development. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2020;6(4):118. DOI: 10.3390/joitmc6040118

13. Teslenko V., Melnikov R., Bazin D. Evaluation of the impact of human capital on innovation activity in Russian regions. Regional Studies, Regional Science. 2021;8(1):109-126. DOI: 10.1080/21681376.2021.1900744

14. Polevaya M. V. Features of professionalization and socialization of youth in the conditions of innovative transformations. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2023;16(2):19-27. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2023-16-2-19-27

15. Ilyina I. Yu. Formation of competitive strategies for teachers of Russian universities in the context of digitalization of education. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2024;17(4):92-101. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2024-17-4-92-101

16. Kolodnyaya G. V. High-tech medium- sized companies as carriers of innovation in the domestic economy. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2025;18(6):16-23. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2025-18-6-16-23

17. Goncharenko L. I. The constructive nature of preferential tax regimes as a determinant of attracting investment in Russia’s innovative development. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2024;17(3):156-166. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2024-17-3-156-166

18. Hawach F., Zhang C., Acharjee S., Nicolas- Sans R. Internet capabilities and innovation in the Balkan countries: The role of foreign technology licensing. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries. 2023;89(2): 12242. DOI: 10.1002/isd2.12242

19. Ning J., Jiang X., Luo J. Relationship between enterprise digitalization and green innovation: A mediated moderation model. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. 2023;8(1):100326. DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2023.100326

20. Rastvortseva S. N. Digitalization and digital platforms in the regional strategic industrial development. Ekonomika promyshlennosti = Russian Journal of Industrial Economics. 2025;18(3):433-449. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17073/2072-1633-2025-3-1464

21. Kapranova L. D. Digital transformation of society and the standard of living of the population. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2025;18(3):81-91. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2025-18-3-81-91

22. Kharchenko K. V. From a smart city to a smart territory: The state and prospects of digitalization of the urban environment and urban economy. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2025;18(3):112-120. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2025-18-3-112-120

23. Strelkova I. A. The “energy impass” of digitalization: Risks for the national economy. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2025;18(6):52-59. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2025-18-6-52-59

24. Loseva O. V. The economics of a company’s digital intellectual assets: Essence, types, valuation and commercialization methods. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo = Economics, taxes & law. 2026;19(1):69-78. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/1999-849x-2026-19-1-69-78

25. Kravchenko S. I. Digital Transformation and sustainable enterprise development: Research trends. Problemy ekonomiki i yuridicheskoj praktiki = Economic problems and legal practice. 2025;21(3):279-287. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.33693/2541-8025-2025-21-3-279-287

26. Kravchenko S. I. Digital transformation of industry: Stable drivers and contextual growth factors. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment = Strategic Decisions and Risk Management. 2025;16(4):350-360. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2025-4-350-360

27. Cai S., Wang H., Zhou X. Do City Size and population density influence regional innovation output? Evidence from China. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing. 2021;2021:3582053. DOI: 10.1155/2021/3582053

28. Samusenko S. A., Popod’ko G.I., Zimnyakova T. S. Imperfection of innovative systems in resource-rich regions. Regional’naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika = Regional Economics: Theory and Practice. 2019;17(2):234-249. DOI: 10.24891/re.17.2.234

29. Wang S., Wang X., Lu B. Is resource abundance a curse for green economic growth? Evidence from developing countries. Resources Policy. 2022;75:102533. DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2021.102533

30. Kondrat’ev V.B., Sergeev P. A., Shul’ceva V. K. Resources- based modernization model: Opportunities and constraints. Moscow: IMEMO; 2016. 326 p. (In Russ).

31. Kravchenko S. I. Mapping the links between resource efficiency and the innovative capacity of national economies. Strategicheskie resheniya i risk-menedzhment = Strategic Decisions and Risk Management. 2023;14(3):262-271. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2023-3-262-271

32. Franco A., Malhotra N., Simonovits G. Social science. Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science. 2014 Sep;345(6203):1502-1505. DOI: 10.1126/science.1255484

33. Tian Z., Li Y., Niu X., Liu M. The impact of digital economy on regional technological innovation capability: An analysis based on China’s provincial panel data. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(7): e0288065. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288065

34. Zeng Y., Zhang Z., Ye Z., Li L. Regional innovation effect of smart city construction in China. PLoS ONE. 2023;18(2): e0281862. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281862