跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.237.6.124) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/24 03:00
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

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:陳協勝
研究生(外文):Hsieh-Sheng Chen
論文名稱:科技產業聚集與創新關係之研究
論文名稱(外文):A Study on the Relationship Between Technology Industrial Cluster and Innovation
指導教授:吳濟華吳濟華引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wu, Jih-Hwa
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立中山大學
系所名稱:公共事務管理研究所
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:公共行政學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:174
中文關鍵詞:知識資本科技產業產業聚集創新二階段最小平方法
外文關鍵詞:Industry ClusterKnowledge CapitalTechnology Industry2SLSInnovation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:376
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:9
在全球化及知識經濟時代之發展下,雖時空距離縮小,社經活動阻隔降低,但區域空間是否已如預期呈現空間無差異現象?區域空間因素對經濟發展的重要性是否改變?許多經濟活動特別是研發創新活動,至今仍需賴面對面溝通,空間之鄰近性仍有助於技術分享及交易成本降低。而觀察知識經濟所依賴的創新活動仍高度強調空間鄰近性、地方化學習網絡與面對面互動等特性,均使得相關高科技產業群聚現象的戲碼仍在世界各地不斷上演。
本研究為解答以上疑惑,除對產業聚集經濟理論及實證研究進行回顧與檢討外,並以台灣地區各縣市為空間分析單元,以近二十年來發布之工商與服務業普查資料,進行實證分析,以探究科技產業廠商群聚與創新之關係。本研究先以文獻研究及OLS方法探討科技產業群聚之可能影響因素及其創新成效影響變數。另在科技產業聚集度可能影響產業創新及也可能受創新產出的影響之假設下,即假設台灣科技產業的群聚與創新產出兩變數間並非互相獨立而是相互影響之內生變數,採二階段最小平方法(2SLS)以探討台灣地區科技產業的群聚與創新產出之間的關係。實證結果顯示科技產業群聚與創新產出間,確實呈顯著且互為正向影響關係,隱示科技產業之聚集因存在聚集經濟利益,導致此聚集現象之形成,而科技產業群聚復因有助於產業創新成效,致有加速產業群聚之效果。
本研究實證結果並發現,台灣地區科技產業有顯著之MAR專業化動態外部經濟存在,隱含地區科技產業越是專業化聚集,愈有助於該地區科技產業之就業成長。科技產業有顯著之Porter地方競爭動態外部經濟效果,科技產業的競爭越激烈越可以帶動地方科技產業的成長。科技產業同時存在顯著的人力資本動態外部經濟現象,顯示地區內人口平均教育程度愈高,或愈接近科研單位 (中心) 及學術研究基地,愈有助於地區科技產業之發展與成長。
顯然產業群聚之聚集經濟力量,一方面是都市形成或經濟活動之空間集中的主要原因,它同時是促進產業創新加速都市發展的動力,基此,本研究建議政府的空間規劃應如何順勢利用此空間聚集力量,以擴大群聚效果,加速區域知識資本累積,應是未來都市產業空間規劃的重要議題。
With globalization and knowledge economy, although distance between spaces and obstacles to social and economic activities are reduced, does variation of space not exist in regional space anymore? Has effect of regional space on economic development changed? Many economic activities, especially research and development, still rely on face-to-face communication, but geographical link is still beneficial to technology sharing and decrease in cost. It’s observed that research and development that knowledge economy relies on still emphasizes geographical link, localization of learning networks, and face-to-face communication, so clustering of high-tech industry is still popular in the world.
In order to solve the abovementioned questions, this research reviews and discusses the theory and research of clustering economy, and analyzes the relationship between clustering of high-tech industry and innovation on the basis of Taiwan’s cities or counties with last twenty’s survey of industrial, business, and service industries. This research discusses effect on clustering of technology industry and its innovative variants. In addition, it’s hypothesized that clustering level of technology industry and innovation of industry are interfacing with each other, in other words, it’s hypothesized that variants as Taiwan’s technology industry and innovation are interfacing with each other instead of being independent. The relationship between clustering of Taiwan’s technology industry and innovation is investigated by 2SLS. The result shows that clustering of technology industry and innovative production have positive correlation, that is to say, clustering of technology industry is beneficial, and it’s also beneficial to innovation of industry, so clustering of industry speeds up.
Results of this research show that technology industry on this island has notable MAR professional dynamic external economics, implying that the more professional clustered one region’s technology industry is, the more beneficial to one region’s professional growth of technology industry is. The more noticeable Porter regional competitive dynamic external economic effect on technology industry is, the more competitive a technology industry is, and the more prevalent one region’s technology is. Technology industry has noticeable human resource dynamic external economics, showing that the better educational background of one region’s population is, the more growth of one region’s technology industry will be.
Clustering industry of agglomeration economy is the primary reason of formation of cities or space centering of economic activities, and it motivates innovation of an industry and development of a city. This research suggests that government should take advantage of clustering knowledge capital of space to multiply effect of clustering and knowledge capital to do space management in terms of future urban space management.
第1章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.1.1 研發創新的重要性 1
1.1.2 產業聚集創新現象與其重要性 2
1.1.3 產業聚集創新對地區發展之影響 3
1.2 研究目的 5
1.3 研究範圍 7
1.3.1 空間分析單元 7
1.3.2 實證研究期間界定 8
1.4 研究方法與內容 9
1.4.1 研究方法 9
1.4.2 研究內容與流程 10
第2章 文獻回顧 15
2.1 產業聚集創新外部效果相關理論探討 15
2.1.1 產業聚集經濟理論 16
2.1.2 產業聚集創新外部效果 18
2.1.3 小結 24
2.2 科技產業群聚影響因素探討 25
2.2.1 產業群聚理論發展 26
2.2.2 科技產業群聚現象與成因 29
2.2.3 小結 34
2.3 區域創新氛圍理論 36
2.3.1 創新的定義與範圍 36
2.3.2 產品創新之衡量指標及量化標準 38
2.3.3 地區環境因素對區域創新成效影響因素之探討 41
2.3.4 小結 47
第3章 台灣地區科技產業空間發展與區域創新分析 51
3.1 本研究科技產業定義與說明 51
3.1.1 科技產業之定義 51
3.1.2 台灣對科技產業定義之演變過程 56
3.1.3 科技產業之定義範圍 59
3.2 台灣科技產業空間結構分布與變遷 66
3.2.1 台灣科技產業的空間分布與變遷 66
3.2.2 台灣科技產業的空間發展型態與變遷 71
3.3 科技產業創新產出及區域創新環境結構分析 78
3.3.1 台灣地區科技產業創新產出分析 78
3.3.2 台灣地區技術創新環境與設施因素 85
3.4科技產業群聚分析發展與衡量 92
第4章 科技產業聚集與創新關係模式建立 101
4.1 模型建立 101
4.1.1 科技產業聚集創新外部效果模型 101
4.1.2 科技產業聚集影響因素 108
4.1.3 影響區域創新成效之因素 112
4.2 研究方法說明 116
第5章 實證結果分析與討論 123
5.1 科技產業聚集創新動態外部性實證分析 123
5.2 科技產業群聚影響因素實證分析 128
5.3 區域創新產出影響因素實證分析 132
5.4 重要變數特性分析 137
第6章 結論與建議 143
6.1 結論 143
6.2 建議 147
6.3 研究限制與後續研究建議 151
參考文獻 153
附錄一 研究模型變數代號與定義………..………………….….……..……………165
附錄二 索引……………………………..………………….………..……………….166
毛遠誠(1995),影響高科技產業經營績效之研究-以半導體產業為例,國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
王志文(1997),臺灣地區都市聚集經濟之研究,臺灣經濟,247,pp.19-33。
王振寰(1999),全球化、在地化與學習型區域:理論反省與建構,台灣社會研究季刊,34,pp.27-52。
王淑芬(1996),地方經濟體質與創新活動-台北都會區資訊電子業的個案研究,國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文。
石齊平、郭照榮(1987),當代計量經濟學,台北:三民書局。
邱皓政(2002),量化研究與統計分析,台北:五南圖書出版公司。
吳明穎(1999),我國高科技產業經營績效之研究:以上市電子業為例,國立成功大學會計學研究所碩士論文。
吳思華(2001),知識資本在台灣,台北:遠流出版社。
吳濟華(2003),科技廠商創新擴散行為對區域發展影響之研究--都市空間結構空間聚集理論:市場與政府的角色,行政院國家科學委員會第四十一屆國外短期研究報告書。
吳濟華、陳協勝(2001),台灣地區工業區廠商創新擴散及其空間互動之探討,中山管理評論,9(2),pp.179-200。
林佳錚(2003),生產者服務業發展與知識製造業互動關係之研究-以新竹科學工業園區周邊地區為例,中華大學建築與都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
林秀英(2000),知識經濟衡量指標建構之探討,台灣經濟研究月刊,23(5),pp.33-45。
金家禾(2002),知識經濟社會與地域發展機會,都市與計劃,29(1),pp.1-20。
施鴻志、解鴻年(1991),台灣地區科技廠商屬性之研究,臺灣銀行季刊,42(3),pp.60-84。
施鴻志、解鴻年、孔繁治(1990),台灣地區新興工業空間發展模式之研究,臺灣銀行季刊,41(1),pp.1-27。
施鴻志、解鴻年、古宜靈(1995),高科技產業區位發展之探討,都市與計劃,22(2),pp.181-200。
施鴻志、解鴻年、胡太山(1992),台灣地區科技園區與區域發展策略之研究,都市與計劃,19(1),pp.75-92。
柯意敏譯(1997),進入高科技業,Nicholas Basta原著,台北:滾石文化出版。
胡太山、張素莉(2001),技術基礎設施、產業聚群與與地方創新網絡建構之初探--以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區為例,建築與規劃學報,2(1),pp.27-42。
唐富藏(1986),區域成長,經濟百科全書—空間經濟學,台北:聯經出版事業公司。
孫智麗(2001),國家創新系統---知識經濟體系下創新政策的新思維,2001知識經濟社會與國家發展學術研討會,pp.207-222。
徐進鈺(1998),邁向一個學習性的區域﹖臺北--新竹高科技走郎的廠商聚集與技術學習,國立臺灣師範大學地理研究報告,29,pp.143-159。
徐進鈺(2001),新世紀台北城市-區域發展戰略前瞻:邁向創造性與學習性城市,亞太四城市發展論壇論文集,pp.49-54。
高士欽(1999)生產網絡與學習型區域-台中工具機產業轉型分析,東海大學社會學研究所博士論文。
許碧峰(1999),研究發展、技術引進與經濟成長,國立政治大學經濟研究所博士論文。
陳信宏、劉孟俊(2001),知識經濟對我國產業發展政策之挑戰,財團法人國家政策研究基金會國政研究報告。
傅豐誠(1999),高科技產業發展戰略及其成效,中華戰略學刊,88,pp.55-94。
曾姿菁(2002),台灣製造業空間成長與結構變遷之研究,國立台北大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
曾參寶(1995),產業雜異化與都市規模之關係—台灣地區實驗分析,國立政治大學地政研究所博士論文。
黃仁德、羅萬時(2000),現代經濟成長理論,台北:華泰文化事業公司。
楊丁元、陳慧玲(1996),業競天擇:高科技產業生態,台北:工商時報。
楊友仁(1999),全球經濟中的區域再結構:新竹新工業空間與區域發展的個案研究,城市與設計,7(8),pp.93-131。
楊政龍、金家禾(2002),知識設施空間分佈對臺灣製造業創新成效之影響,臺灣土地研究,4,pp.101-123。
楊政龍、金家禾(2002),知識設施對臺灣製造業生產力之影響,都市與計劃,29(4),pp.513-532。
楊重信(2001),台灣都是製造業動態外部之實證,2001年中華民國區域科學學會研討會論文集,pp.323-363。
楊重信、林育諄(2003),台灣都市生產者服務業動態外部之實證,都市與計劃,30(2),pp.91-107。
經濟部技術處(1998),1997產業科技白皮書,經濟部出版品。
經濟部研發部(1999),馬來西亞發展高科技產業之對策及對我可能之影響,經濟部出版品。
趙振瑛(1998),人力資本與經濟成長關係之研究,國立政治大學經濟研究所博士論文。
葉秋南譯(1988),簡易計量經濟學,Gujarati原著,台北:臺灣銀行經濟研究室。
蔡宜璋(1999),技術能力、技術網路與產品創新策略關連性之研究-以台灣化工業開發電子化學品為例,輔仁大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
薛琦、張祥憲(1999),我國高科技產業與經濟發展,自由中國工業,89(2),pp.13-34。
魏克儒(2002),創新與空間-產研地理鄰近性之探討,國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所碩士論文。
羅於陵、廖盈琪、蔡旻樺、梁永榮(2003),台灣產業集群發展及創新能力分析:第一輯產業集群演進,行政院國家科學委員會科學技術資料中心。
龔明鑫(2003),我國研發創新能力之國際比較,我國產業結構下的研發創新投資研討會論文集。
Acs, Z. J., Anselin, L., Varga, A. (2002). Patents And Innovation Counts As Measures Of Regional Production of New Knowledge, Research Policy, 31(7), pp. 1069-1085.
Albino, V., Garavelli, A. C. & Schiuma, G. (1999). Knowledge Transfer and Inter-Firm Relationship in Industrial Districts: The Role of Leader Firm, Technovation, 19(1), pp.53-63.
Anas, A., Arnott, R. & Small, K. (1998). Urban Spatial Structure, Journal of Economic literature, 31(3), pp.l426-1460.
Anderson, G. (1994). Industry Clustering for Economic Development, Economic Development Review, 12(2), pp.26-33.
Anselin, L., Varga, A. & Acs, Z. J. (2000). Geographic and Sectoral Characteristics of Academic Knowledge Externalities. Papers in Regional Science, 79(4), pp.435-443.
Audretsch, D. B. & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D Spillovers and The Geography of Innovation and Production, The American Economic Review, 86(3), pp.630-640.
Autant-Bernard, C. (2001). Science and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from the Frenth Case, Research Policy, 30(7), pp.1069-1078.
Bahrami, H. & Evans, S. (1995). Flexible Re-Cycling and High-Technology Entrepreneurship, California Management Review, 37(30), pp.92-87.
Baldwin, R. E. (1999). Agglomeration and Endogenous Capital, European Economic Review, 43(2), pp. 253-280.
Baptista, B. & Swann, P. (1998). Do Firms in Clusters Innovate More?, Research Policy, 27, pp.525-540.
Baptista, R. (2001). Geographical Clusters and Innovation Diffusion, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 66(1), pp.31-46.
Beeson, P. E. (1992). Source of the Decline of Manufacturing in Large Metropolitan Areas, Journal of Urban Economics, 40(1), pp.78-84.
Beise, M. & Stahl. H. (1999). Public Research and Industrial Innovations in Germany, Research Policy, 28(4), pp.397-422.
Belussi, F. (1999). Policies for the Development of Knowledge-intensive Local Production Systems, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23, pp.729-747.
Benzler, G. & Wink, R. (2003). Evaluating Innovation Processes: The Political Dimension, International Journal of Technology Management, 26(2), pp.121-130.
Blind, K. & Grupp, H. (1999). Interdependencies between the Science and Technology Infrastructure and Innovation Activities in German Regions: Empirical Finding and Policy Consequences, Research Policy, 28(5), pp.451-468.
Blonigen, B. A., Kolpin, V. (2001). Technology, Agglomeration, and Regional Competition for Investment, http:www.nber.org/papers/w8862, pp.1-26.
Bottazzi, L., Peri, G. (2003). Innovation and Spillovers in Regions: Evidence from European Patent Data, European Economic Review, 47(4), pp.687-710.
Breschi, S. (2000). The Geography of Innovation: A Cross-Sector Analysis, Regional Studies, 34(3), pp.213-229.
Breschi, S., Lissoni, F. & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-Relatedness in Firm Technological Diversification, Research Policy, 32(1), pp.69-87.
Cabral, R. & Dahab, S. S. (1998). Science Parks in Developing Countries: The Case of BIORIO in Brazil, International Journal of Technology Management, 16(8), pp.726-739.
Camagni, R. (1995). The Concept of Innovative Milieu and its Relevance for Public Policies in European Lagging Regions, The Journal of the RSAI, 74(4), pp.317-340.
Chorda, I. M. (1996). Towards the Maturity Stage: An Insight into the Performance of French Technopoles, Technovation, 16(3), pp.143-152.
Ciccone, A., Hall, R. E. (1996). Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity, American Economic Review, 86(1), pp.54-70.
Cooke, P. (2001). New Economy Innovation systems: Biotechnology in Europe and The USA, Industry and Innovation, 8(3), pp.267-289.
Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G. & Etxebarria, G. (1998). Regional System of Innovation: An Evolutionary Perspective, Environment and Planning A, 30(9), pp.1563-1584.
Creane, A. (1996). An Informational Externality in a Competitive Market, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 14(3), pp.331-344.
Crosby, M. (2000). Patents, Innovation and Growth, Economic Record, 76(3), pp.255-262.
Doloreux, D. (2002). What We should Know about Regional Systems of Innovation, Technology in Society, 24(3), pp.243-263.
Dory, T. (2002). The Role of Innovation Strategies in Regional Development from the Accession Countries Point of View, The IPTS Report, 5(66), pp.21-27.
Drennan, M. P. (1997). The Performance of Metropolitan Area Industries, Economic Policy Review, 17(1), pp.49-60.
Eliasson, G. (1998). Competence Blocs and Industrial Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy, STI Review-Science/Technology/Industry, 22, pp.209-241.
Etemad, H. & Lee, Y. (2001). Technological Capabilities and Industrial Concentration in NICs and in Dustrialized Countries: Taiwanese SMEs versus South Korean Chaebols, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 1(3), pp.329-355.
Feldman, M. P., Audretsch, D. B. (1999). Innovation in cities: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition, European Economic Review, 43(2), pp. 409-429.
Feldman, M. P., Florida, R. (1994). The Geographic Sources of Innovation: Technological Infrastructure and Product Innovation in The United States, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84(2), pp.210-229.
Feser, E. J., Bergman, E. M. (2000). National Industry Cluster Templates: A Framework for Applied Regional Cluster Analysis, Regional Studies, 34(1), pp.52-71.
Florida, R. (1995). Toward the Learning Region, Futures, 27(5), pp.527-536.
Freel, M. S. (2003). Sectoral Patterns of Small Firm Innovation, Networking and Proximity, Research Policy, 32(5), pp.751-770.
Fritsch, M. & Schwirten, C. (1999). Enterprise-University Co-operation and the Role of Public Research Institutions in Regional Innovation Systems, Industry and Innovation, 6(1), pp.69-83.
Furman, J. L., Stern, S. & Porter, M. E. (2002). The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity, Research Policy, 31(6), pp.899-933.
Glaeser, E. L., Kallal, H. D., Scheinkman, J. A. & Shleifer, A. (1992). Growth in Cities, The Journal of Political Economy, 100(6), pp.1126-1152.
Gong, G. & Keller, W. (2003). Convergence and Colarization in Global Income Levels: A Review of Recent Results on the Role of International Technology Diffusion, Research Policy, 32(6), pp.1055-1079.
Gregersen, B. and Johnson, B. (1991). Learning Economics, Innovation Systems and European Integration, Regional Studies, 25(5), pp.479-490.
Griliches, J. (1990). Patent Statistics as Economic Indications: A survey, Journal of Economic Literature XXXV3, pp.1661-1707.
Hagedoorn, J. & Cloodt, M. (2003). Measuring Innovative Performance: Is there an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators?, Research Policy, 32(8), pp.1365-1379.
Hall, P. (1999). The Future of Cities, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 23(3), pp. 173-185.
Harhiffm, D., Henkel, J. & Von Hippel, E. (2003). Profiting from Voluntary Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing Their Innovations, Research Policy, 32(10), pp.1753-1769.
Henderson, V. (1995). Innovation and Agglomeration: Two Parables Suggested by City-Size Distributions: Comment, Japan and the World Economy, 7(4), pp. 391-393.
Henderson, V., Kuncoro, A. & Turner, M. (1995). Industrial Development in Cities, Journal of Political Economy, 103(5), pp.1067-1090.
Hendry, C., Brown, J., Ganter, H. D.& Hilland, S. (2000). Industry Clusters as a Location for Technology Transfer and Innovation, Industry & Higher Education, 15(1), pp.33-41.
Higgins, J. M. (1995). The Core Competence: Innovation, Planning Review, 23(6), pp.32-35.
Hollenstein, H. (2003). Innovation Modes in the Swiss Service Sector: A Cluster Analysis Based on Firm-level Data, Research Policy, 32(5), pp.845-863.
Jacobs, J. (1969). The Economy of Cities, NY: Random House.
Jaffe, A. (1989). Real Effects of Academic Research, The American Economic Review, 79(5), pp.957-970.
Jaffe, A., Trajtenber, M. & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillover as Evidenced by Patent Citations, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, pp.577-598.
Kaiser, U. (2002). Measuring Knowledge Spillovers in Manufacturing and Services: An Empirical Assessment of Alternative Approaches, Research Policy, 31(1), pp.125-144.
Kauko, K. (1996). Effectiveness of R&D Subsidies: A Sceptical Note on the Empirical Evidence, Research Policy, 25(3), pp.321-323.
Kennedy, P. (1996). A Guide to Econometrics, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Kim, J. (2002). Network Building between Research Institutions and Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs): Dynamics of Innovation Network Building and Implications for a Policy Option, International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 2(3), pp.272-285.
Kotval, Z., Mullin, J. (1998). The Potential for Planning an Industrial Cluster in Barre/ Vermont: A Case of Hard-Rock Resistance in the Granite Industry, Planning Practice & Research, 13(3), pp.311-318.
Krugman, P. (1995), Innovation and Agglomeration: Two Parables Suggested by City-Size Distributions, Japan and the World Economy, 7(4), pp.371-390.
Krugnam, P. (1991). Geography and Trade, MIT Press.
Lissoni, F. (2001). Knowledge Codification and the Geography of Innovation: The Case of Brescia Mechanical Cluster, Research Policy, 30(9), pp.1479-1500.
Liyanage, S. (1995). Breeding Innovation Clusters through Collaborative Research Networks, Technovation, 15(9), pp.553-567.
Lucas, R. E. (1988). In the Mechanics of Economic Development, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, pp.3-42.
Luger, M. (2001). The Use of Cluster Analysis, in High Tech Industrial Park Planning, Symposium on Industrial Park Planning and Development, 8(2), pp.52-73.
Maillat, D. (1995). Territorial Dynamic, Innovative Milieus and Region Policy, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 7, pp.157-165.
Mansfield, E., Lee, J. Y. (1996). The Modern University: Contributor to Industrial Innovation and Recipient of Industrial Support, Research Policy, 25, pp.1047-1058.
Mansfirld, C. (1991). Academic Research and Industrial Innovation, Research Policy, 20(1). pp.1-12
Maskell, P., Malmberg, A. (1999). Localised Learning and Industrial Competitiveness, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23, pp.165-178.
Matlay, H. (2000). Industry-Higher Education Collaborations Within Small Business Clusters, Industry & Higher Education, 14(6), pp.386-393.
Mitra, J., Matlay, H. (2000). Thematic Clustering: Connecting Organizational Learning in Small and Medium-Sized Businesses, Industry & Higher Education, 14(6), pp.371-385.
Morgan, K. (1997). The Learning Region, Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal, Regional Studies, 31(5), pp.462-485.
Mowery, D. & Ziedonis, A. A. (1998). Market Failure or Market Magic? Structural Change in the US National Innovation System, STI Review-Science/Technology /Industry, 22, pp.101-136.
Muller, E., Zenker, A. (2001). Business Services as Actors of Knowledge Transformation: The Role of KIBS is Regional and National Innovation Systems, Research Policy, 30(9), pp.1501-1516.
Ng, L. F. Y. & Tuan, C. (2003). Location Decisions of Manufacturing FDI in China: Implications of China''s WTO Accession, Journal of Asian Economics, 14(1), pp.51-72.
O''doherty, D., Arnold, E. (2003). Understanding Innovation: The Need for a Systemic Approach, The IPTS Report, 71, pp.29-36.
OECD (1997). National Innovation Systems, OECD, pp.1-48.
OECD (1999). Boosting Innovation-Cluster Approach, OECD, pp.1-85.
OECD (2002). Dynamiting National Innovation Systems, OECD, pp.1-96.
Peri, G. (2002). Globalization, Rigidities and National Specialization: A Dynamic Analysis, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 13(2), pp.151-177.
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York, Free Press.
Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and competitive: New Agendas for Companies, Governments and Institutions, Harvard Business School Press.
Porter, M. E. & Stern, S. (2001). Innovation: Location Matters, Sloan Management Review, 42(3), pp.25-36.
Premus, R. (2003). University Knowledge Production and Industrial Innovation: The Evidence, International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 2(3), pp.263-273.
Premus, R., Sanders, N. & Jain, R.K. (2003). Role of the University in Regional Economic Development: The US Experience, International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, 2(4), pp.369-383.
Rama, R., Calatrave, A. (2002). The Advantages of Clustering: The Case of Spanish Electronics Subcontr Actors, International Journal of Technology Management, 24(7/8), pp.764-791.
Remirez-Esparza, L. (2003). Cluster Analysis of Innovative Companies of the Basque Country, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 3(4), pp.373~402.
Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth, The Journal of Political Economy, 94(5). pp.1002-1037.
Rosenbloom, R. S. & Spencer, W. J. (1996). The Transformation of Industrial Research, Issues in Science and Technology, 12(3), pp.68-74.
Rosenfeld, S. (1995). Industrial Strength Strategies, Regional Business Clusters and Public Policy, Aspen Institute, Washington, D. C.
Rychen, F & Zimmermann, J. B. (2002). Birth of a Cluster : The Microelectronics Industry in the Marseilles Metropolitan Area, Journal of Technology Management, 24(7/8), pp.792-817.
San Diego Association of Government (2002).Understanding Cluster Analysis.
San Diego Association of Government (2002). What are Industrial Clusters?
Saxenian, A. (1994), Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Simon, C. T. (1998). Human capital and Metropolitan Employment Growth, Journal of Urban Economics, 43, pp.223-243.
Smith, k. (1996). Economic Infrastructure and Innovation Systems, Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Printer/Cassell Academic, London.
Steinle, C., Schiele, H. (2002). When Do Industries Cluster? A Proposal on How to Assess an Industry''s Propensity to Concentrate at a Single Region or Nation, Research Policy, 31(6), pp.849-858.
Stern, S., Porter, M. P. & Furman, J. L. (2000). The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity, NBER working paper 7876, http://www.nber.org/papers/w7876, pp.1-56.
Sternberg, R. (1996). Regional Growth Theories and High-Tech Regions, International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 20(6), pp.529-542.
Sternberg, R. (1999). Innovative Linkages and Proximity: Empirical Results from Recent Surveys of Small and Medium Sized Firms in German Regions, Regional Studies, 33 (5), pp.529-540.
Storper, M., Scott, A. J. (1995). The Wealth of Regions: Market Forces and Policy Imperatives in Local and Global Context, Futures, 27(5), pp.505-526
Storper, M. (1995). Regional Technology Coalitions an Essential Dimension of National Technology Policy, Research Policy, 24(6), pp. 895-911.
Suarez-Villa, L. (2002). High Technology Clustering in the Polycentric Metropolis:A View from the Los Angeles Metropolitan, International Journal of Technology Management, 24(7/8), pp.818-842.
Tijssen, R. W. (2001). Global and Domestic Utilization of Industrial Relevant Science: Patent Citation Analysis of Science-technology Interactions and Knowledge Flows, Research Policy, 30(1), pp.35-54.
Trajtenberg, M. (2001). Innovation in Israel 1968-1997: A Comparative Analysis Using Patent Data, Research Policy, 30(3), pp.363-389.
Walshok, M. L., Furtek, E., Lee, C. W. B., Windham, P. H. (2002). Building Regional Innovation Capacity- The San Diego Experience, Industry & Higher Education, 16(1), pp.27-42.
Wang, T. H. (1999). Urban Growth in Taiwan: The Impacts of Specialization, Human Capital and Land Use Policies, 1981-1996, Ph. D. dissertation, Cornell University.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 施鴻志、解鴻年、胡太山(1992),台灣地區科技園區與區域發展策略之研究,都市與計劃,19(1),pp.75-92。
2. 施鴻志、解鴻年、古宜靈(1995),高科技產業區位發展之探討,都市與計劃,22(2),pp.181-200。
3. 施鴻志、解鴻年、孔繁治(1990),台灣地區新興工業空間發展模式之研究,臺灣銀行季刊,41(1),pp.1-27。
4. 施鴻志、解鴻年(1991),台灣地區科技廠商屬性之研究,臺灣銀行季刊,42(3),pp.60-84。
5. 金家禾(2002),知識經濟社會與地域發展機會,都市與計劃,29(1),pp.1-20。
6. 吳濟華、陳協勝(2001),台灣地區工業區廠商創新擴散及其空間互動之探討,中山管理評論,9(2),pp.179-200。
7. 王志文(1997),臺灣地區都市聚集經濟之研究,臺灣經濟,247,pp.19-33。
8. 胡太山、張素莉(2001),技術基礎設施、產業聚群與與地方創新網絡建構之初探--以新竹科學園區暨周邊地區為例,建築與規劃學報,2(1),pp.27-42。
9. 徐進鈺(1998),邁向一個學習性的區域﹖臺北--新竹高科技走郎的廠商聚集與技術學習,國立臺灣師範大學地理研究報告,29,pp.143-159。
10. 傅豐誠(1999),高科技產業發展戰略及其成效,中華戰略學刊,88,pp.55-94。
11. 楊政龍、金家禾(2002),知識設施空間分佈對臺灣製造業創新成效之影響,臺灣土地研究,4,pp.101-123。
12. 楊政龍、金家禾(2002),知識設施對臺灣製造業生產力之影響,都市與計劃,29(4),pp.513-532。
13. 楊重信、林育諄(2003),台灣都市生產者服務業動態外部之實證,都市與計劃,30(2),pp.91-107。