跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.231.230.177) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/28 20:09
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:許書銘
研究生(外文):Hsu Sue-Ming
論文名稱:產業國際競爭力之發展及其影響因素分析
論文名稱(外文):Analysis on the Development of International Competitiveness of Industries and Its Affecting Factors — Competitive Advantage of Nations Perspective
指導教授:洪明洲洪明洲引用關係林師模林師模引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hong Min-ChowLin Shih-Mo
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:商學研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:一般商業學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2000
畢業學年度:88
語文別:中文
論文頁數:165
中文關鍵詞:競爭力顯示性比較利益鑽石模型雁行理論產業內貿易
外文關鍵詞:competitivenessRCAPorter''''s Diamondflying-geeseintra-industry trade
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:149
  • 點閱點閱:2363
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:516
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:6
全球化的趨勢下,產業與國家層次已成為探討競爭力時重要的議題。有鑑於此,本研究由國家競爭力的觀點出發,探討產業/國家層次的因素對產業國際競爭力的影響。
在產業國際競爭力的發展方面,本研究發現,一國中各個產業競爭力的發展大致有其順序性,且同一區域內國家間產業的發展具有高度的連動性,亦即由於產業間比較利益的移轉,會出現區域間的國際水平分工,並進一步帶動產業競爭力的發展。東亞與美洲兩區域都出現明顯的雁行發展型態,每個區域內國家依其產業發展型態可區分為數個集群,各個集群內產業競爭力的變化趨勢相當類似,而不同集群間則有顯著不同;且在個別區域中,不同集群間的國際水平分工對其國際競爭力的影響都相當顯著。再者,各國間「整體工業」競爭力的差異逐年縮小,長期而言呈現向下收斂的現象,但「整體農業」競爭力的發展在1980年代中期以前各國間的差異則逐漸擴大,之後各國間的差異才開始縮小,可能未來亦會出現類似「整體工業」的趨勢,值得進一步觀察。
在產業國際競爭力的影響因素方面,過去的鑽石模型的研究多集中於國內影響因素的探討,本研究進一步延伸至產業所面對的國際環境,而整合了傳統單國的鑽石模式與全球互動下的鑽石模型後,對各國產業的國際競爭力具有更佳的解釋力。由研究結果亦可以發現,在不同的產業、區域或經濟發展階段,國內鑽石強度與全球鑽石強度和產業國際競爭力的相關程度各有不同,大致而言,技術密集度較高的產業,或以技術性密集產業為主的國家,來自全球鑽石模型的影響程度也就越大。而不同因素在不同模式中其重要性也有所不同。研究結果顯示,生產要素、國內相關支援產業、國際相關支援產業、國際市場需求等因素與產業國際競爭力都呈現正相關,而對於技術性密集產業而言,市場的開放程度與資本投入程度越高,對產業競爭力的發展也越有利。有鑑於此,現階段欲提升我國產業國際競爭力,可行的政策方向包括獎勵資本投資、強化國際水平分工(特別是東亞區域間的經濟合作)、提升產品附加價值、開放高科技產業競爭等。
In analyzing competitiveness, recent researches have, in response to globalization, gradually shifted their focus from firm level to industrial and national level. Following this trend, this thesis investigates the impact of industrial and national factors on the international competitiveness of industries, based on the perspective of nations’ competitive advantage.
In the development of international competitiveness of industries, the results show that, within a country, there exists a certain sequence of development for industries. Furthermore, for countries within the same region, the development of competitiveness for related industries are inter-linked, indicating that shifts in comparative advantages would result in international horizontal specialization and the further development of competitiveness in the same region. The following of flying-geese pattern in East Asia and America illustrates this phenomenon. Within different countries in the same region, industries can be divided into several groups. The development of competitiveness within the groups is quite similar while that across groups are significantly different. Both in East Asia and America, the international horizontal specialization among different groups has significant impact on their international competitiveness. In addition, the differences in competitiveness for ‘total manufacturing’ among countries have diminished. In other words, it shows a convergence in competitiveness for manufacturing in the long run. Contrast to manufacturing sector, the variation of total agriculture competitiveness did not converge until mid-1980s. It is, however, worthwhile to see whether agriculture sector would follow the pattern of development of manufacturing in the future.
With regard to the factors affecting international competitiveness of industries, previous studies have based mainly on Porter’s Diamond Model, which focuses on domestic factors. By incorporating international factors into Porter’s Diamond model, this thesis demonstrates that the integration of factors from both domestic and global level could provide better explanations on international competitiveness of industries among different countries. The indices generated in this study indicate that variations in the impact of strength of domestic and international diamonds on international competitiveness of industries exist among industries and regions as well as at different development stages. Generally speaking, the more technology intensive an industry is or the more labor intensive a country is, the more impact strength of international diamond has on their international competitiveness. Meanwhile, different factors play different roles in different models. According to our results, there is a positive correlation between international competitiveness of industries and factor conditions, domestic and international suppliers, and international demand. In the case of technology intensive industries, freer market and larger investment increase international competitiveness. Based on our analysis, we conclude that policies that will increase Taiwan''''s international competitiveness may include encouraging investment, consolidating international horizontal specialization especially in East Asia, adding more value to products, encouraging competitions among high technology industries, etc.
封面
產業國際競爭力之發展及其影響因素分析─國家競爭力觀點
目錄
壹、緒論
一、研究背景與動機
二、研究目的
三、研究流程與步驟
四、研究特色
貳、文獻探討與理論建立
一、競爭與競爭力
二、產業國際競爭力指標之研究
三、產業國際競爭力影響因素之研究
四、產業國際競爭力的發展及其與經濟成長的關聯
參、研究方法頭資料來源
一、研究架構與研究假設
二、指標的選取與建立
三、資料說明
四、分析方法
肆、產業國際競爭力之發展
一、農業相關產業國際競爭力之發展
二、工業部門國際競爭力之發展
三、產業競爭力發展總論
伍、產業國際競爭力影響因素分析
一、總體模式分析
二、不同產業特性分析
三、不同區域模式分析
四、不同經濟發展階段模式分析
五、產業國際競爭力影響因素總論
陸、結論與建議
一、研究結論
二、研究意涵
三、研究限制與未來研究方向
參考文獻
附錄一、世界各國農業部門歷年RCA
附錄二、世界各國工業部門歷年RCA
一、中文部分:
1. 尤敏君(民86),「出口競爭力指標之研究─兼論我國出口產業競爭力」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第20卷第4期,頁35-44。
2. 方世杰(民84),「國家競爭力的探討」,科學發展月刊,第23卷第2期,頁141-148。
3. 方世杰(民87),「國家競爭力影響因素之研究─中、美、日之實證」,台北銀行月刊,第28卷第9期,頁2-20。
4. 王旭堂、王塗發、朱雲鵬、李秉正、林師模、周濟、徐世勳、廖如敏(民88),「關於雁型理論的一個檢視:GTAP資料運用於東亞貿易與產業結構變遷之研究」,1999台灣經濟學會年會,台北。
5. 史美強(民82),「美國競爭力之決定因素:理論探討」,中國行政評論,第2卷第4期,頁73-118。
6. 左峻德(民86),「國家競爭力和經濟成長率之互動關係」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第20卷第4期,頁15-21。
7. 左峻德(民86),「國家競爭力和經濟成長率之互動關係--兼論我國競爭力之評比」,經濟情勢暨評論,第3卷第1期,頁103-115。
8. 朱正中(民85),「依比較利益強化產業競爭力」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第19卷第9期,頁23-28。
9. 吳中峻、徐世勳 (民88),「我國產業政策演進與對美日國際分工型態調整之分析」,1999東吳經濟學術研討會,台北:東吳大學。
10. 吳青松 (民85),國際企業管理:理論與實務,台北:智勝出版社。
11. 吳進泰(民84),「我國產業在國際市場之競爭力分析」,臺灣經濟研究月刊,第18卷第9期,頁59-62。
12. 吳榮義(民87),「提昇國家競爭力之策略與作法」,台灣經濟預測與政策,第28卷第2期,頁77-85。
13. 吳靜怡(民84),「台灣競爭力成績單:名次耀眼,隱憂在後」,天下雜誌,84年10月,頁59-62。
14. 邢慕寰(民85),「臺灣經濟成長與結構變動的進一步觀察」,經濟論文,第14卷第2期,頁1-33。
15. 周登陽、鄭惠文(民86),「兩岸農產品出口在日、港競爭態勢」,農業經濟叢刊,第3卷第2期,頁171-208。
16. 周濟(民86),「談國家競爭力與總體經濟的關係」,主計月報,第84卷第1期,頁39-42。
17. 承立平(民86),「基礎建設與國家競爭力」,主計月報,第84卷第1期,頁43-45。
18. 林向愷(民87),「評跨世紀國家建設計劃」,台灣經濟預測與政策,第28卷第2期,頁87-104。
19. 林師模、許書銘(民86),「台灣七十年代之產業關聯結構變動─社會會計矩陣乘數分析」,台灣經濟預測與政策,第28卷第1期,頁35-75。
20. 林師模、許書銘(民87),「服務業生產、貿易與行銷策略」,1998勞動力結構轉型與經濟發展研討會,高雄:中山大學。
21. 林師模、許書銘(民88),「東亞經濟發展與產業轉型之比較分析」,發表於1999新世紀經濟發展與人力培育之挑戰研討會,高雄:中山大學。
22. 林漢昌(民86),企業國際競爭力評估指標及其內涵之研究:以臺灣資訊電子業為例,成功大學國際企業研究所碩士論文。
23. 洪明洲(民87),「國家資源培育模型:Porter鑽石模型的補充」,1998企業跨國經營管理研討會,台北:輔仁大學。
24. 洪毓甡(民86),「從人力資源看我國國家競爭力」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第20卷第4期,頁53-60。
25. 洪璇昊(民84),中韓兩國國家競爭力決定因素之比較研究-以個人電腦產業為例,中興大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
26. 胡勝正、詹維玲 (1999),「臺灣總要素生產力決定因素之研究」,自由中國之工業,第89期,頁1-50。
27. 徐子光(民86),「WEF國家競爭力評估方法之研析」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第20卷第4期,頁22-28。
28. 徐子光(民86),「國家競爭力評估方法之研析」,經濟情勢暨評論,第3卷第2期,頁131-154。
29. 徐作聖(民82),「從科技管理到企業競爭力」,1993年中華民國科技管理研討會論文集,pp. 327-331。
30. 許士軍、湯明哲、于卓民、洪明洲、蘇國賢(民84),我國國際競爭力評估之研究,行政院經濟建設委員會委託研究計畫。
31. 陳正男、譚大純(民87),「國家競爭力、產業競爭力與廠商績效--依據世界競爭力報導與Porter鑽石模式為基礎之實證研究」,企業管理學報,第43期,頁73-105。
32. 陳正倉、林惠玲(民83),「臺灣的產業結構:出口集中度之研究」,臺灣經濟發展論文集,頁281-295。
33. 陳明郎(民88),經濟成長,台北:華泰書局。
34. 陳思慎(民83),「由出口競爭力變化看臺灣未來產業發展方向」,臺灣經濟研究月刊,第17卷第7期,頁65-70。
35. 陳博志 (民83),「臺灣的產業變遷結構」,臺灣經濟發展論文集,頁260-280。
36. 黃恆獎、王仕茹(民86),「國家競爭力指標之構念效度分析--IMD與WEF指標之評估」,管理學報,第14卷第4期,頁635-665。
37. 黃琮琪、陳益壯(民85),「臺灣農產品出口競爭能力與競爭效果評估--毛豬產業案例」,台灣經濟,230,頁79-104。
38. 楊秀玲(民86),「韓國國家競爭力之探討」,台灣經濟研究月刊,第20卷第4期,頁68-74。
39. 蔡宗羲(民82),產業經濟理論與日本實證分析,經濟部產業發展諮詢委員會叢書58,台北:經濟部。
40. 蕭峰雄(民87),「提升國家競爭力,邁向廿一世紀法」,台灣經濟預測與政策,第28卷第2期,頁55-76。
41. 薛立敏(民86),「WEF & IMD對國家競爭力的衡量有何不同」,經濟前瞻,第12卷第4期,頁90-93。
42. 薛立敏(民87),「WEF與IMD對國家競爭力衡量方法之比較」,台灣經濟預測與政策,第28卷第2期,頁37-53。
43. 譚大純(民87),產業國際競爭力之衡量:以Porter鑽石模式為基礎之量表建構與跨國實證,成功大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
44. 蘇喜華(民80),「1991全球競爭力報導研析」, 產業金融,第74期,頁71-81。
二、英文部分:
1. Akamatsu, K.(1962), “A Historical Pattern of Economic Growth in Developing Countries,” The Developing Economics , Vol .1, pp.3-25.
2. Ansoff, H. I. (1965), Corporate Strategy, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Business School Press.
3. Balassa, B. (1966),“Tariff Reductions and Trade in Manufactures among Industrial Countries,”American Economics Review, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp.466-473.
4. Balassa, B. and L. Bauwens (1988), Changing Trade Patterns in Manufactured Goods: An Econometric Investigation, North-Holland Press.
5. Bellak, Christian J and A. Weiss (1993), " A note on the Austrian '''' diamond''''," Management International Review, Vol.. 33, No. 2, pp. 109-118.
6. Bernard, A. and C. I. Jones (1996), “Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement Across Industries and Countries,” American Economic Review, Vol. 86, pp. 1216-1238.
7. Bernhofen, D. M. (1998), “Intra-Industry Trade and Strategic Interaction: Theory and Evidence,” Journal of International Economics, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp.77-96.
8. Bowen, H. P., E. E. Leamer and L. Sveikauskus (1987), “Multicountry Multifactor Tests of the Factor Abundance Theory, “American Economics Review, Vol.77, pp. 791-809.
9. Chuang, Yih-chyi (1995), "Identifying the Sources of Growth in Taiwan’s Manufacturing Industry," Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp.445-463.
10. Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1991), Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations , 5th ed., IL: Dryden.
11. D''''Cruz, J. R. and A. M. Rugman (1993), "Developing International Competitiveness: The Five Partners Model," Business Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 60-72.
12. Deardorff, A. V. (1982),“The General Validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem,”American Economics Review, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp.683-694.
13. Dinopoulos, E., J. Oehmke and P. S. Segertrom (1993), “High-Technology-Industry Trade and Investment: The Role of Factor Endowments,” Journal of International Economics, Vol. 34, No. 1-2, pp. 49-71.
14. Doryan, E. A. (1993), "An Institutional Perspective of Competitiveness and Industrial Restructuring Policies in Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 7, pp. 451-458.
15. Duffey, J. (1988), "Competitiveness and Human Resources," California Management Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 92-100.
16. Dunning, John H. (1993) "Internationalizing Porter''''s Diamond," Management International Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 7-15.
17. Durkin, J. T. Jr. and M. Krygier (1998), “Comparative Advantage and the Pattern of Trade within Industries,” Review of International Economics, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 292-306.
18. Elbehri A. and R. McDougall (1998), “Data Base Summary: Effective Rates of Protection,“ in Global Trade, Assistance, and Protection: The GTAP 4 Data Base, edited by R. McDougall, A. Elbehri and T. P. Truong, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University Press.
19. Ellison G. and E. L. Glaeser (1997), “Geographic Concentration in US Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 105, No. 5, pp.889-927.
20. Ellison G. and E. L. Glaeser (1999), “The Geographic of Industry: Does Natural Advantage Explain Agglomeration? ” American Economics Review, Vol. 89, No. 2, pp.311-316.
21. Fischer, R. D. and P. Serra (1996), “Income Inequality and Choice of Free Trade in a Model of Intraindustry Trade,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 111, No. 1, pp.41-64.
22. Francis, A. and P. K. Tharakan (1989), The Competitiveness of European Industry, Routledge, London and New York.
23. Gassmann, H. (1995), "Globalisation and Industrial Competitiveness," OECD Observer, Vol. 197 (Dec/Jan), pp. 38-42.
24. Goldwell, D., and J. Reid (1998), “An Inquiry into the Effects of US Mulitnationals of US Intra Industry Trade,” Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 81-104
25. Grant, R. M. (1991), “Porter’s Competitive Advantage of Nationals: An Assessment,” Strategic Management Journal, 12, pp. 535-548.
26. Grein, A. F. and C. S. Craig (1996), "Economic Performance Over Time: Does Porter''''s Diamond Hold at the Nation Level?" International Executive, Vol 38, No. 3, pp. 303-322.
27. Grossman, Gene M. and E. Helpman (1991), Innovation and Growth:Technological Competition in the Global Economy, Cambridge:MIT Press.
28. Hamel, G. and C. K. Prahalad (1994), Competing for Future, Harvard University Press.
29. Hanson, G. H. (1996), “Economic Integration, Intraindustry Trade, and Frontier Regions,” European Economic Review, Vol. 40, No. 3-5, pp. 941-949.
30. Hennay, N. B. and L. W. Steele (1986)," Technology and Trade: A Study of US Competitiveness in Seven Industries," Research Management, Vol. 29, No. 16, pp. 14-22.
31. Hertel, T. L. (1993), Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Hodgetts, R. (1993), "Porter''''s Diamond Framework in a Mexican Context," Management International Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 41-54.
33. Hofer, C. W. & D. Schendel (1978), Strategy Formulation: Analysis Concept, St. Paul, MN:West.
34. Hummels, D. and J. Levinsohn (1993), “Product Differentiation as a Source of Comparative Advantage? ” American Economics Review, Vol.83, No. 2, pp. 445-449.
35. IMD. (1995), The 1995 Year Book of World Competitiveness Report.
36. IMD. (1996), The 1996 Year Book of World Competitiveness Report.
37. James, W. E. (1994), “Changing Patterns of Trade in Goods and Services in the Pacific Region: Market-Driven Economic Integration,” Business Economics, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 14-20.
38. Jones, Charles I. (1995),“R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth,”Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 103, pp.759-84.
39. Kanz, J. W. (1994), "Technology, Power and Structure: Consequences for US Semiconductor Competitiveness," International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 9, No. 5-7, pp. 733-755.
40. Kim, S. (1999), “Regions, Resources, and Economic Geographic: Sources of US Regional Comparative Advantage, 1880-1987,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 1-32.
41. Krugman, P. (1979), “Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition and International Trade,” Journal of International Economics, Vol. 9, pp. 469-479.
42. Krugman, P. (1981), “Intra-Industry Specialization and the Gains from Trade,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 89, pp. 959-973.
43. Krugman, P. A. (1991), "Myths and Realities of US Competitiveness," Science, Nov. 8, pp. 811-815.
44. Kurth, W. (1990), "Competitiveness through Technology," OECD Observer, Vol. 164, pp. 19-21.
45. Kuznets, S. (1966), Modern Economic Growth, New Haven, Yale University Press.
46. Leamer, E. E. (1993), “Factor-Supply Differences as a Source of Comparative Advantage,” American Economics Review, Vol.83, No. 2, pp. 436-439.
47. Liu, X. and H. Song (1997), "China and the Multinations: A Winning Combination," Long Range Planning, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 74-83.
48. Lucas, Robert, Jr. (1998), "On the Mechanics of Economic Development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 22, No. 1, 3-42.
49. Mankiw, N. G., D. Romer and D. N. Weil (1992), "A Contribution to the Empiric of Economic Growth," Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 107, No. 2, pp.407-437.
50. Martin, D. (1994), "The Export-led Growth Hypothesis Valid for Industrialized Countries?" The Review of Economics and Statistics.
51. Matusz, S. J. (1998), “Calibrating the Employment Effects of Trade,” Reviews of International Economics, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp.592-603.
52. McArthur, D. N. & R. L. Schill (1995), "International Cooperative Technology Arrangement: Improving their roles in Competitive Strategy," Journal of Business Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, Jan. 67-79.
53. McDougall, R., A. Elbehri and T. P. Truong (1998), Global Trade, Assistance, and Protection: The GTAP 4 Data Base, Purdue University: Center for Global Trade Analysis.
54. Miller, W. H. (1992), "Industry''''s ''''92 Challenges," Industry Week, Vol. 6, pp. 12-16.
55. Murray, L. W. (1986), “Learning to Compete," Business Horizon, pp. 2-12.
56. Narula, R. (1993), “Technology, International Business and Porter’s Diamond: Synthesizing a Dynamic Competitive Development Model, ” Management International Review, Vol. 33, pp.85-107.
57. Nelson, R. (1992), "Recent Writings on Competitiveness: Boxing the Compass," California Management Review, Vol. 34, pp. 127-137.
58. Pavitt, K. and P. Patel (1991), "Competitiveness: Technological and Strategies of the World Larger Companies," Science and Public Policy, Vol. 18, No. 6, pp. 363-368.
59. Peterson, J. (1988), “Export Share and Revealed Comparative Advantage: A Study of International Travel,” Applied Economics, No. 20, pp. 351-365.
60. Peterson, J. and R. Barras (1987), “Measuring International Competitiveness in Service,” Service Industries Journal, No. 7, pp. 131-142.
61. Porter, M. E.(1986), "Changing Patterns of International Competition," California Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp.11-23.
62. Porter, M. E.(1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nations, New York. Free Press.
63. Porter, M.E. (1986), “Competition in Global Industries: a Conceptual Framework,” in Competition in Global Industries, Edited by M. E. Porter, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
64. Romer, Paul M. (1986), "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 94, No. 5, pp.1102-1037.
65. Romer, Paul M. (1990), "Endogenous Technical Change," Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 98, pp. S71-102.
66. Roy, S. and J. M. Viaene (1998), “Preferences, Country Bias, and International Trade,” Review of International Economics, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.204-219.
67. Rugman, A. M & A. Verbeke (1993), “Foreign Subsidiaries and Multinational Strategic Management: An Extension and Correction of Porter''''s Single Diamond Framework," Management International Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 71-84.
68. Rugman, Alan M. (1995), Research in Global Strategic Management, Vol. 5, Issue: Beyond the Diamond.
69. Rugman, Alan M. and J. R. D''''Cruz (1993), "The ''''Double Diamond'''' Model of International Competitiveness: The Canadian Experience," Management International Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 17-39.
70. Scherer, F. M. and D. Ross (1990), Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, Boston L Houghton Mifflin, 3rd Ed.
71. Scott, L. and T. Vollrath (1992), Global Competitive Advantages and Overall Bilateral Complementarity in Agriculture, A Statistical Review, USDA, ERS, Washington DC.
72. Stevens, J. (1995), Evaluating the Impact of Korean Trade Policy: The Role of Intermediate Input, M. S. Thesis, unpublished.
73. Tassey, G. (1990), "Structural Change and Competitiveness: The US Semiconductor Industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 85-93.
74. Tysynski, H. (1957), “World Trade in Manufactural Commodities 1899-1950,” The Mancheste School.
75. Van Den Bosch, F., A. Van Prooijen, and M. E. Porter (1992), "The Competitive Advantage of European Nations: The Impact of National Culture - A Missing Element in Porter''''s Analysis?; A Note on Culture and Competitive Advantage: Response to van den Bosch and van Prooijen", European Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 173-178.
76. Van Den Bosch, F.; A. Van Prooijen (1992), "European Management: An Emerging Competitive Advantage of European Nations," European Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 445-448.
77. Vernon, R. (1966), "International Investment and International Trade in the Product Life Cycle," Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 83, No. 1, pp.190-207.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 7. 左峻德(民86),「國家競爭力和經濟成長率之互動關係--兼論我國競爭力之評比」,經濟情勢暨評論,第3卷第1期,頁103-115。
2. 2. 方世杰(民84),「國家競爭力的探討」,科學發展月刊,第23卷第2期,頁141-148。
3. 31. 陳正男、譚大純(民87),「國家競爭力、產業競爭力與廠商績效--依據世界競爭力報導與Porter鑽石模式為基礎之實證研究」,企業管理學報,第43期,頁73-105。
4. 28. 徐子光(民86),「國家競爭力評估方法之研析」,經濟情勢暨評論,第3卷第2期,頁131-154。
5. 26. 胡勝正、詹維玲 (1999),「臺灣總要素生產力決定因素之研究」,自由中國之工業,第89期,頁1-50。
6. 17. 承立平(民86),「基礎建設與國家競爭力」,主計月報,第84卷第1期,頁43-45。
7. 16. 周濟(民86),「談國家競爭力與總體經濟的關係」,主計月報,第84卷第1期,頁39-42。
8. 15. 周登陽、鄭惠文(民86),「兩岸農產品出口在日、港競爭態勢」,農業經濟叢刊,第3卷第2期,頁171-208。
9. 11. 吳進泰(民84),「我國產業在國際市場之競爭力分析」,臺灣經濟研究月刊,第18卷第9期,頁59-62。
10. 34. 陳思慎(民83),「由出口競爭力變化看臺灣未來產業發展方向」,臺灣經濟研究月刊,第17卷第7期,頁65-70。
11. 36. 黃恆獎、王仕茹(民86),「國家競爭力指標之構念效度分析--IMD與WEF指標之評估」,管理學報,第14卷第4期,頁635-665。
12. 41. 薛立敏(民86),「WEF & IMD對國家競爭力的衡量有何不同」,經濟前瞻,第12卷第4期,頁90-93。
13. 4. 林盛宏(1986),「產品語意造形發展模式研究與應用」,明志工專學報,第18期,pp.117-134。
14. 5. 官政能、鄧建國(1994),「以再設計的策略探討視覺與機能組件之造形轉換程式」,一九九四年技術與教學研討會工業設計組論文集,臺北,pp.87-97。
15. 7. 莊明振、鄧建國(1994),「造形溯衍模式應用於產品造形開發之探討」,一九九四年技術與教學研討會工業設計組論文集,臺北,pp.53-66。