內生成長理論認為研究發展會為產品及製程帶來創新，以提高技術效率，而研究發展尚具有外部性，稱為外溢效果。許多實證研究指出，許多企業大部分的報酬是來自於研發的外溢效果。而電子產業因產品生命週期短及研發支出龐大的特性，近年來以購併來快速整合企業資源及分享知識的行動已蔚為風潮；然而，併購雖然可以較經濟方式整合生產、分配系統、快速取得較大的營運量，但由於研發知識具有公共財的特性，所以至今仍無法確切證明併購在研究發展方面能獲得較高優勢，而今處於重視創新及產品品質的時代，研究發展活動則更顯重要。故本研究乃將探討我國電子產業能否藉由併購以強化其研發之優勢。
而本研究中關於研發外溢之定義為二家廠商因併購行為而整合企業研發資源，由原本兩個獨自進行研發的公司因合併而無意間造成技術之擴散。被併公司平時研發之成果因與主併公司的互有供需關係及併購活動而外溢出去，其研發外溢效果在合併前藉由中間財貨之購買或其他無形之管道傳遞知識造成被併公司的生產結構產生變化，合併後亦藉由接收無形之知識外溢資本而使生產結構產生變化。
本研究以Cobb-Douglas生產函數來分析研發及其外溢效果對生產力變動的影響程度。針對電子產業中於民國89至90年第二季間曾進行「吸收合併」的廠商為研究對象，以併購事件發生之前八季（即前二年）至併購事件發生後一直到民國九十年第三季為止之各季為研究期間，除了分為併前及併後之外，再將各自細分為與被併廠商有重大供需關係及無重大供需關係，以探討廠商在併購前後之研發及其外溢資本之變化與生產力之變動趨勢。
實證結果顯示：
1.企業自行研發方面，併購後研發資本對生產力有顯著正相關；
2.有形外溢資本方面，對於生產力有顯著之正面挹注效果，顯示主併公司與被併公司在併購前以中間財移轉及投資財交易往來者，所造成之研發外溢效果確實能幫助生產力之提昇，且其所造成之影響相當大；
3.無形外溢資本方面，在有供需關係者的併購前、後均產生顯著的相關性，惟合併前為負相關，合併後則轉為正相關；
4.獲利能力與生產力方面，兩者均有較合併前退步的趨勢；
5.與被併公司無重大供需關係者方面，研發資本及無形外溢資本對生產力之貢獻則無顯著變數。

Abstract
In accordance with endogenous growth theory, the innovation created by R&D activities could increase technological efficiency. One of R&D’s characteristics is the R&D externality, which is named as “spillover”. Many empirical studies found that the spillover effect could bloom up the business profit. The business combination becomes the main one of business operation style. Enterprises can easily share business resources and knowledge in one another by consolidation. One of R&D characteristic is that technological knowledge is a public good; business cannot take advantage of merger and acquisition (M&A) to advance R&D results so far. This study tried to examine whether the electronic firms can reinforce their R&D competition by combination.
This paper regarded the spillover effects of R&D as to combination of two firms, which used to invest in R&D activities independently, causes the diffusion of technology. The technology developed by an acquiree can affect the productivity growth of the acquirer by the way of the transaction of intermediate or investment goods and the diffusion of technological knowledge.
Cobb-Douglas production function examined the relationship between R&D spillover and productivity change. Data samples were electronic firms undertaking “merger” from 2000 to the first half year of 2001.
The empirical results as follows:
1.There is significant between R&D of business itself and productivity.
2.There is significant between tangible spillover capitalism and productivity, which means the transaction of R&D embodied in intermediate or investment goods could increase the productivity.
3.When the two companies have an important relationship, the coefficients of intangible channel of R&D spillover from before and after are both significant. But, the former is negative, while the latter turned to positive.
4.Both of profitability and productivity decreased after combination.
5.There is not significant among R&D, intangible spillover and productivity when two companies with no important relationship.

目 錄
圖目錄……………………………………………………………… Ⅱ
表目錄……………………………………………………………… Ⅳ
第一章 緒 論…………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究背景與動機…………………………………………1
第二節 研究目的…………………………………………………3
第三節 研究架構……………………… ……………………… 6
第二章 外溢效果文獻探討……………………………………… 8
第一節 研究發展外溢效果定義…………………………………8
第二節 研究發展外溢效果特性…………………………………11
第三節 研究發展外溢效果對生產力之影響……………………13
第三章 研發對生產力貢獻之研究方法………………………… 19
第一節 研究假說…………………………………………………19
第二節 外溢效果及研發資本之研究假設………………………21
第三節 研究設計…………………………………………………24
第四節 研究範圍…………………………………………………29
第五節 研究分析方法……………………………………………41
本章註釋……………………………………………………………43
第四章 研發及其外溢效果之實證結果分析…………………… 46
第一節 併購廠商之營業收入與研發支出………………………46
第二節 樣本資料分析……………………………………………59
第三節 研究發展及其外溢效果對生產力之影響………………62
第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………… 66
第一節 結論………………………………………………………66
第二節 研究限制…………………………………………………67
第三節 建議與未來研究方向……………………………………68
參考文獻…………………………………………………………… 69

參考文獻
1.王傳媺，民國83年，市場結構、研發外溢效果及技術移轉分析－台灣人纖產業之個案研究，中國文化大學經濟學系未出版碩士論文。
2.司徒達賢，民國90年，策略管理新論: 觀念架構與分析方法，智勝文化，初版。
3.行政院主計處第三局第六科，台灣地區產業關聯線上資料庫。（http://www.stat.gov.tw）
4.李朝賢、邱泰穎，民國83年，「台灣農業研究發展與技術變動之經濟分析」，八十三年度經濟學門專題計劃研究成果發表會。
5.周君銓，民國79年，財務報表分析，東華書局：台北，第三版第二刷。
6.林威伸，民國87年，企業研究發展與專利權間之遞延效應，東吳大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
7.邱泰穎，民86年，「研究發展外溢效果經濟涵義與理論模型之推導」，臺灣經濟，第244期，頁73-83。
8.邱泰穎，民國90年，「研究發展外溢效果與技術變動之探討」，企銀季刊，第24卷，第4期，頁107-19。
9.洪紫芳，民國90年，公司價值、研發與生產力的關係，朝陽科技大學財務金融學系未出版碩士論文。
10.孫梅瑞，民國89年，國內上市公司從事公司購併活動對經營績效影響之研究，國立政治大學企業管理學系未出版博士論文。
11.徐恆功，民國90年，策略購併後整合模式之研究－以資訊業為例，國立政治大學企業管理學系未出版碩士論文。
12.財政部國稅局，固定資產耐用年數表。
13.張蓉蓉，民國89年，企業管理功能與經營績效之研究－以印刷電路板業為例，銘傳大學管理科學系未出版碩士論文。
14.莊奕琦、許碧峰，民國88年，「研究發展對生產力的貢獻及產業間的外溢效果：臺灣製造業實證」，經濟論文，第27卷，第3期，頁407-32。
15.許碧峰，民國87年，研究發展、技術引進與經濟成長，國立政治大學經濟學系未出版博士論文。
16.陳宗亮，民國82年，研究發展外溢效果決定因素之研究，國立中央大學產業經濟系未出版碩士論文。
17.陳忠榮、陳威勳，民國81年，「研究發展外溢效果對廠商利潤績效之影響－以自動化新產業為例」，經濟論文叢刊，第20期，第2輯，頁155-75。
18.陳致綱，民國89年，台灣高科技產業之研究發展、產業間與產業內之外溢效果--動態要素需求模型之應用，國立中山大學經濟學系未出版碩士論文。
19.黃雅苓，民國87年，研究發展支出與經營績效關係及其費用化之探討－以台灣上市公司電子業及非電子業為例，國立政治大學會計學系未出版碩士論文。
20.楊志海，民國88年，技術來源、創新與生產力，國立中央大學產業經濟系未出版碩士論文。
21.經濟部技術處，民國90年，產業技術白皮書，臺北市：經濟部。
22.廖世義，民國90年，臺灣製造業企業功能對生產力績效之影響，國立成功大學工業管理學系未出版博士論文。
23.蔡光第、楊浩彥，民國85年，「多層次巢覆式R&D外溢效果與其對臺灣製造業不同科技部門之貢獻」，經濟論文叢刊，第24期，第1輯，頁29-59。
24.鄭功賢，民國90年，「併購一定是台灣重頭大戲─世界購併風起雲湧啟示錄」，財訊，第230期，頁208-15。
25.盧復國，民國88年，「台灣企業策略聯盟發展之研究（下）」，產業經濟，第210期，頁1-18。
26.寶來證券，民國91年，「DRAM廠合併攸關未來發展」，經濟日報，三月六日，第18版。
27.Bernstein, J. I. and M. I. Nadiri, 1988, “Inter-Industry R&D Spillovers, Rates Of Return, And Productivity,” The American Economic Review, 78, No.2, pp. 429-34.
28.-----------------, 1989, “Research and Development and Intra-Industry Spillovers: An Empirical Application of Dynamic Duality,” Review of Economic Studies, 56, pp. 249-69.
29.Bernstein, J. I., 1988, “Cost of Function, Intra-and Inter-Industry R&D Spillovers: Canadian Evidence,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 21, pp.324-47.
30.------------------, 1989, “The Structure of Canadian Inter-Industry R&D Spillover and the Rates of Return to R&D,” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 37, No. 3, pp. 315-28.
31.Bosworth, D. L. and K. Schott, 1978, “The Rate of Obsolescence of Technical Knowledge: Note and Comment,” The Journal Of Industrial Economics, 26, No. 3, 273-279.
32.Bresnahan, T. F., 1986, “Measuring the Spillovers from Technical Advance: Mainframe Computers in Financial Services,” The American Economic Review, 76, No. 4, pp. 742-55.
33.Brown, M. G. and R. A. Svenson, 1998, “Measuring R&D Productivity,” Research Technology Management, 41, No. 6, pp. 30-5.
34.Chen, L. H., C. Kao, S. Kuo, T. Y. Wang, and Y.C. Jang, 1996, “Productivity Diagnosis via Fuzzy Clustering and Classification: An Application to Machinery Industry,” International Journal of Management Science, 24, No. 3, pp.309-19.
35.Coe, D. and E. Helpman, 1995, “International R&D Spillovers,” European Economic Review, 39, pp. 859-87.
36.Cuneo, P. and J. Mairesse, 1984, “Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing,” R&D, Patents and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, pp. 375-92.
37.D’ Aspremont, C. and A. Jacquemin, 1988, “Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers,” The American Economic Review, 78, No. 5, pp. 1133-7.
38.Goto, A. and K. Suzuki, 1989, “R&D Capital, Rate of Return on R&D Investment and Spillover of R&D in Japanese Manufacturing Industries,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71, No. 4, pp. 555-64.
39.Griliches, Z. and J. Mairesse, 1984, “Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level,” R&D, Patents and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, pp. 339-74.
40.-------------, 1979, “Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth,” The Bell Journal of Economics, 10, No. 1, pp. 92-116.
41.-------------, 1980, “R&D and the Productivity Slowdown,” American Economic Association, 70, No. 2, pp. 343-8.
42.-------------, 1994, “Productivity, R&D, and the Data constrant,” The American Economic Review, 84, No. 1, pp.1-23.
43.Grossman, G. M. and E. Helpman, 1991, “Trade, Knowledge Spillovers,” European Economic Review, 35, No. 2,3, pp. 517-26.
44.------------------------------, 1991, Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy, Cambridge MA, MIT Press.
45.Jaffe, A. B., 1986, “Technology Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms’ Patents, Profits, and Market Value,” The American Economic Review, 76, No. 5, pp. 984-1001.
46.Kang, J. H., 1992, “Effect of Foreign Technological Knowledge on Domestic R&D Investment,” Ph. D. Dissertation, New York University.
47.Leahy, D. and J. P. Neary, 1999, “R&D Spillovers and the Case for Industrial Policy in an Open Economy,” Oxford Economic Papers, 51, No. 1, pp. 40-59.
48.Levin, R. C. and P. C. Reiss, 1984, “Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure,” R&D, Patents and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, pp. 175-204.
49.Mansfield, E., 1980, “Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing,” The American Economic Review, 70, No. 5, pp. 863-73.
50.Nadiri, M. I., 1980, “Contributions and Developments of Research and Development Expenditures in the U. S. Manufacturing Industries,” Capital, Efficiency and Growth, Ballinger: Cambridge, MA.
51.-------------, 1993, “Innovations and Technological Spillovers,” NBER Working Paper, No. 4423.
52.Odagiri, H., 1992, Growth through Competition, Competition through Growth: Strategic Management and the Economy in Japan, Clarendon Press: Oxford.
53.Pakes, A. and M. Schankerman, 1984, “The Rate of Obsolescence of Knowledge, Research Gestation Lags and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources,” R&D, Patents and Productivity, University of Chicago Press.
54.Romer, P. M., 1990, “Endogenous Technological Change,” The Journal of Political Economy, 98, No. 5, pp. S71-S102.
55.Schankerman, M., 1981, “The Effect of Double Counting and Expensing on the Measured Returns to R&D,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 63, pp. 454-8.
56.Scherer, F. M., 1982, “Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 64, No.4, pp.627-34.
57.--------------, 1982, “Inter-Industry Technology Flows in the United States,” Research Policy, 11, No.4, pp.227-45.
58.--------------, 1984, “Using Linked Patent and R&D Data to Measure Inter-Industry Technology Flows,” R&D, Patents and Productivity, University of Chicago Press, pp.417-64.
59.Schmookler, J., 1966, Invention and Economic Growth, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
60.Spence, M., 1984, “Cost Reduction, Competition and Industry Performance,” Econometrica, 52, No. 1, pp. 101-21.
61.Suzuki, K., 1993, “R&D Spillovers and Technology Transfer among and within Vertical Keiretsu Groups: Evidence from the Japanese Electrical Machinery Industry,” International Journal of Industrial Organization, 11, No. 4, pp. 573-91.
62.Sveikauskas, L., 1981, “Technological Inputs and Multifactor Growth,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 63, No. 2, pp. 275-82.
63.Taylor, B. W. and K. D. Davis, 1977, “Corporate Productivity: Getting It all Together,” Industrial Engineering, 9, pp. 32-6.
64.Terlecyj, N. E., 1974, Effects of R&D on the Productivity Growth of Industries: An Exploratory Study, Washington, D. C.: National Planning Association.
65.---------------, 1980, “Direct and Indirect Effects of Industrial Research and Development on the Productivity Growth of Industries,” New Development in Productivity Measurement and Analysis, University of Chicago Press, pp. 359-77.
66.Uno, K., 1989, “Research and Development in an Input-Output Framework: A Methodological Exposition,” Measurement of Services in an Input-Output Framework, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
67.Wolff, E. N. and M. I. Nadiri, 1987, “Spillover Effects. Linkage Structure, Technical Progress and Research and Development,” C.V. Starr Center Research Report, No. 8743.