隨著大陸開放改革與其成本競爭優勢，台灣手工具產業從全球第一大手工具出口國到現在為第三大出口國。而面對大陸成本的優勢、品質參差不一等，中華民國對外貿易發展協會與手工具工業公會積極推廣廠商參與展覽，並給予補助，除了推廣台灣優良產品外，更可藉由參展吸收他國產品新知，利於我國產品改善與創新；在國內，也推動許多產業活動，例如品牌推廣、製程改善、技術延伸觀摩等。
近年來，政府更積極推動聚落廠商間的合作，藉由彼此知識交流、技術學習、通路分享等，利於產品創新，增加績效。如經濟部國際貿易局於2007年利用產業聚落的優勢，以合作代替競爭，專案輔導並建立自有品牌數泓科技，整合十餘家手工具廠的資源，成為國內第一家擁有數位手工具研發與製造核心能力，並擁有「eclatorQ」共同品牌的數位手工具公司，以加速拓展全球市場。除此之外，還有「T-team」與「亞克聯合品牌行銷」等，都是利用聚落內的資源，分享知識技術，以達到製程創新或產品創新等，利於後續產品推廣。
本研究以台灣手工具產業廠商為母體，以發放問卷方式來收集相關資料。共發放170份問卷，總計有效問卷為103份，彙整之後，以SPSS統計軟體進行迴歸分析。
研究結果顯示，聚落內的廠商，其供應鏈完整，加上廠商本身的資源與能力，透過與顧客、供應商及政府/大學研究機構合作，使廠商達到創新績效。而聚落內競爭者，因手工具產業廠商較傳統，對於競爭著採取自我保護措施，不願分享資源，故對其創新績效沒有助益。

Taiwan, no longer the world's largest exporter of hand tools, is the third largest exporter; however, Mainland China, after the reform and opening-up, owns the cost advantage and has become the largest exporter of hand tools in the world. While facing the cost advantage, quality inconsistencies, etc. from Mainland China, Taiwan External Trade Development Council and Taiwan Hand Tool Manufacturers' Association encourage Taiwan hand tool manufacturers to attend the exhibitions and provide subsidy for the purpose of promoting Taiwan products and more importantly, learning and absorbing other countries product knowledge to improve and innovate products. Besides, they contribute many industry activities, such as branding, manufacturing process improvement, skills and technology demonstration and so on.
In recent years, Taiwan government more actively promotes the cooperation between manufacturers to innovate products and increase the manufacturer’s benefits and profits by mutual sharing of the knowledge, technological skills, sales channel, etc. For example, in 2007, Bureau of Foreign Trade made use of the advantages of industrial clusters and had the manufacturers cooperate one another instead of compete. This way, by integrating the resources of more than a dozen hand tool manufacturers, Eclatorq Technology Co., Ltd. was established. This company with his own brand "eclatorQ" becomes Taiwan’s first digital hand tool manufacturer with R & D and manufacturing core competencies and accelerates them into the global market. In addition, there are "T-team" and "Ark Co-Branded Marketing", etc. using the resources within the hand tool industrial clusters and sharing knowledge and technology skills to achieve process or product innovation, which help follow-on product promotions.
Our research takes Taiwan hand tool manufacturers for population. 170 questionnaires were distributed to collect relevant information and data, and there are 103 valid questionnaires. After the data were compiled, they were analyzed using SPSS statistical software.
Our research result showed that the manufacturers within the industrial clusters, possessing complete supply chain, plus their own resources and capabilities, could achieve fine innovation performance through working and cooperating with customers, suppliers and government / university research institutions. However, as hand tool manufacturers are more traditional and afraid that the competitors within the industrial clusters will steal their product knowledge and property, they are not willing to share the resources with the competitors. Therefore, the manufacturers could not achieve innovation performance through cooperating with their competitors.

第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景與動機
第二節 研究目的
第二章 文獻回顧
第一節 產業聚落
第二節 產業聚落之型態
第三節 產業聚落之創新優勢
第四節 產業聚落之合作模式對創新績效
第五節 創新績效
第三章 研究方法與設計
第一節 研究架構與假說建立
第二節 聚落內廠商合作對於創新績效之影響
第三節 資料來源
第四節 變數定義
第四章 實證結果分析
第一節 敘述性統計分析
第二節 信度分析
第三節 因素分析
第四節 相關分析
第五節 迴歸分析
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論
第二節 研究限制和後續發展
第六章 參考文獻
附錄-研究問卷

1.Afuan, Allan (1998), Innovation Management: Strategies, Implementation, and Profits, Oxford University Press, NY.
2.Ahmad, J. (1992), Import Competition, Government Subsidies, and Trade with Developing Countries. Journal of Economic Studies, 19(2), 48-57.
3.Anderson, G. (1994), Industry Clustering for Economic Development. Economic Development Review, Vol. 12(2), 26-32.
4.Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996), R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production. America Economic Review, 86(3), 630-645.
5.Aulakh, P. S., K. Masaaki, and S. Arvind (1996), Trust and Performance in Cross Broader Marketing Partnerships: A Behavioral Approach, Journal of International Business Studies, 27(5), 1005-1032.
6.Bahraml, H. & Evans,　S. (1995), Flexible Re-Cycling and High-Technology Entrepreneurship, Calfornia Management Review, 37(3), 62-89.
7.Baptista, B. and Swann, P. (1998), Do Firms in Clusters Innovate More? Research Policy, 27, 525-540.
8.Baudry, M. and Dumont, B. (2006), Comparing Firms’ Triadic Patent Applications across Countries: Is There a Gap in terms of R&D Effort or a Gap in terms of Performances, Research Policy, 35, 324–342.
9.Bessant, J. and Cayn, S. (1997), High-Innovation through Management. International Journal of Technology Management. 14(1), 7-28
10.Cabral, R. and Dahab, S. S. (1998), Science Parks in Developing Countries：the Case of BIORIO in Brazil, International Journal of Technology Management, 16(8), 726-739.
11.Camagain, R. (1995), The Concept of Innovative Milieu and Its Relevance for Public Polices in European Lagging Regions.” The Journal of the RSAI, 74(4), 317-340.
12.Cuieford, J. P. (1965), Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
13.Dahmen, Eric (1952), Entrepreneurial Activity and the Development of Swedish Industry, 1919-1939, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL.
14.Debackere K., Luwel M., and Veugelers Reinhilde (1999), Can Technology Lead to a Competitive Advantage? A Case Study of Flanders Using European Patent Data, Jointly Published by Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford and Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, 44(3), 379-400.
15.Dicken, P. (1998), Global Shift：Transforming the World Economy (3rd ed.), Paul Chapman Publishing.
16.Doeringer, P. B., & Terkla, D. G. (1995), Business Strategy and Cross-industry Clusters, Economic Development Quarterly, 9(3), 225-237.
17.Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, and L. Soete (1988), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter Publishers.
18.Dunteman, G. H. (1994), Principal Component Analysis. In M. S. Lewis-Beck (Eds.), Factor Analysis and Related Techniques, Sara Miller McCune, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 157-245.
19.Durker, P. F. (1985), Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles, New York: Harper and Row.
20.Feldman, M. P. and R. Florida (1994), The Geographic Sources of Innovation: Technological Infrastructure and Product Innovation in the United States, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84, 210-229.
21.Feser, E.J. and E.M. Bergman (2000), National Industry Cluster Templates: A Framework for Applied Regional Cluster Analysis, Regional Studies, 34, 1.
22.Freeman, C. (1987), Technology and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Printer.
23.Grupp, H. (1997), The Links between Competitiveness, Firm’s Innovative Activities and Public R&D Support in Germany: An Empirical Analysis. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 9(1), 19-34.
24.Håkansson, H. (1987), Industrial Technological Development: A Network Approach. London: Croom Helm.
25.Hamel, Gary and Skarzynskim Peter (2001), Innovation: The New Route to Wealth, Journal of Accountancy, 192(5), 65-68.
26.Haruhiko Higashi. (1995). The Technologies in Japan. Working Paper, Industry and Higher Education.
27.Hennart, D. H. and Szymanski, D. M. (2001), Why Some New Products Are More Successful Than Others, Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 362-375.
28.Hill, E.W. and Brennan, J. F. (2000), A Methodology for Identifying the Drivers of Industrial Clusters: The Foundation of Regional Competitive Advantage, Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 65-96.
29.Jaffe, A., Trajtenber, M. and Henderson, R. (1993), Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillover as Evidenced by Patent Citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 557-598.
30.Joseph, D’ C. and Rugman, A. M. (1992), Business Network for International Competitiveness. Business Quarterly. 56(4), 101-107.1993.
31.Lackman, C. L. (2005), The Comparative Influence of Government Funding by the US Commerce Department's Advanced Technology Program and Private Funding on the Marketing Strategy of the High-tech Firms. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 13(1/2), 179-198.
32.Langvik, T. A., Johansen, F. R., Callisen, F., Normannn, S. and Thoresen, J. (2005), Innovation and Regional Development. AI & Society, 19(4), 384-406.
33.Lerner, J. (1999), The Government as Venture Capitalist: The Long-run Impact of the SBIR Program. The Journal of Business, 72(3), 285-318.
34.Littler, D., Leverical, F. and Wilson, D. (1998), Collaboration in New Technology Based Product Markets, International Journal of Technology Management, 15(1/2), 139-159.
35.Marshall A. (1920), Principles of Economics, Macmillan: London.
36.Mohr, J. and Spekman, R. (1994), Communication Strategies in Marketing Channel: A Theoretical Perspective, Journal of Marketing, 60 (July).
37.Morgan, K. (1997), The Learning Region: Institutions, Innovation and Regional Renewal, Regional Studies, 31(5), 491-503.
38.Nelson RR, Winter S. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
39.Patel P, Pavitt KLR. (1997), The Technological Competencies of the World’s Largest Frms: Complex and Path Dependent, But Not Much Variety. Research Policy 26(2), 141–156.
40.Pegels, C. C. and M. V. Thirumurthy (1996), The Impact of Technology Strategy on Firm Performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 43(3), 246-249.
41.Porter, M.E. (1990), The Competitive Advantage of Nation, London: Free Press.
42.Porter, M. E. (1998), Clusters and the New Economics of Competition, Harvard Business Review, November-December, 77-90.
43.Ruth, S.K. (1996), Successful Business Alliance. Classroom Strategies: The Methodology of Business Education, 34, 10-23.
44.Sakakibara, K. (1993), R＆D Cooperation among Competitors：A Case Study of the VLSI Semiconductor Research Project in Japan, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 10, 394-407.
45.Sakakibara, M. (2001), The Diversity of R＆D Consortia and Firm Behavior : Evidence from Japanese Data, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 49, 181-196
46.San Diego Association of Government (2001), San Diego Regional Employment Clusters-Engines of the Modern Economy, Sandag Info, 8(1), 1-10.
47.Sarin, S. and Mahajan, V. (2001), The Effect of Reward Structures on the Performance of Cross-functional Product Development Teams, Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 35-53.
48.Schumann, P. A., et al (1994), Innovation: Straight Path to Quality, Customer Delight & Competitive Advantage, NY: McGraw-Hill.
49.Steinle, C. and Schiele, H. (2002) When Do Industries Cluster? A Proposal on How to Access an Industry’s Propensity to Concrete at a Single Region or Nation, Research Policy, 31(6), 849-858.
50.Stuart, T. E. (1998), Network Positions and Propensities to Collaborate: An Investigation of Strategic Alliance Formation in a High-technology Industry, Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 668-698.
51.Swann, P. and Prevezer, M. (1996), A Comparison of the Dynamics of Industrial Clustering in Computing and Biotechnology,” Research Policy, 25(2), 1139-1157.
52.Tsai, W. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intra Firm Networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41 (2), 464-476.
53.Tidd, J., Bessant, J. and Pavitt, K. (2005), Managing Innovation：Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change.
54.Waits, M. J. (2000), The Added Value of The Industry Cluster Approach to Economic Analysis, Strategy Development, and Service Delivery, Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 35-51.
55.Wind, J. and Mahajan, V. (1997), Issues and Opportunities in New Product Development : An Introduction to the Special Issue, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 1-12.
56.Wint, A. G. (1998), The role of Government in Enhancing the Competitiveness of Developing Economies. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11(4), 281-299.