ABSTRACT Chinese universities face a persistent paradox: Despite substantial investments in R&D and strong knowledge production performance, their socioeconomic impact remains limited. To address this disconnect, we develop a dual‐stage efficiency framework distinguishing knowledge production (KPE) from knowledge transformation (KTE) and implement a three‐stage DEA‐Malmquist approach to isolate managerial efficiency. Analysing panel data from 56 leading Chinese universities, we identify technological regression in knowledge transformation—rather than input or scale inefficiency—as the core constraint. Notably, Project 211 universities outperform their Project 985 counterparts in knowledge production efficiency, while 985 institutions demonstrate superior transformation efficiency. Both groups, however, exhibit nearly identical technological stagnation in transformation, underscoring systemic—rather than tier‐specific—barriers. These findings challenge conventional resource‐centric policy paradigms and emphasise the critical need to realign incentive structures and build translational capabilities to resolve China's science–technology paradox.
Tong et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: