从企业的进退机制看集群发展

【作者】 童旭红；

【导师】 马明宗；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 产业经济学， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 对集群的研究,绝大多数学者都集中在集群聚集的动因、集群的正效应及集群发展的政策、对策等方面,对于集群风险的研究却比较少,即使有也都是从集群整体角度来考虑的。从单个企业角度研究企业集群风险的则更少,本文旨在为此作一个较初步的探索。本文以高新技术企业为例,从企业的进退机制分析集群的发展及其边界,并为我国高科技园区的发展提供相应的对策和建议。文章首先回顾了企业区位理论和企业集群理论,指出了在企业区位决策中集群存在的影响。本文的分析以高新技术企业为例,高新技术企业不同于一般的企业,具有高投入、高产出、高效益、高风险、低能耗等特点。这就决定了在高新技术企业的区位决策中,不是简单地考虑运输成本、劳动力成本,主要考虑的是技术和知识的可获得性,以及该区域内的创新、文化等氛围。由于集群所具有的集聚效应,如外部经济、规模经济、知识共享、创新合作与信息交流等,使得集群对于外部企业具有很强的吸引力。因此,高新技术企业在做区位决策时必然面临一个不可回避的问题,即是否选择进入已有的集群,以获得集群所具有的优势。同样地,在集群中的企业也会随时衡量,是否应该继续留在集群中?而这种企业的进退行为不但涉及到单个企业的发展和获利,同样也影响到了企业集群的发展,或者说是造成了企业集群生命周期的演变。企业对集群的选择实质上就是权衡进入集群的获益和进入集群可能面临的损失或溢出的结果。集群内既存在着集聚效应又存在着分散效应,高新技术企业对集群的选择主要考虑的是人力资本流动性、专业化分工与协作、知识与信息扩散以及技术创新溢出等带来的积极作用——集聚效应,又可能面临着这些方面所具有的负面影响——分散效应。比如人力资本的自由流动在一定程度上可实现该要素的合理利用和集群内企业的最优需要,但也可能导致企业对人才的竞争激烈且投资热情大大下降。其结果是提高了工资而并未改善生产效率,从2而削减了企业进入集群的热情,意味着集群内的企业乃至整个集群竞争力的衰竭;技术创新溢出使集群内企业通过学习、模仿,以及由于地理上的临近而形成知识与技术的迅速传播,在有利于集群内的企业获得大量的知识和信息的同时,往往会造成企业产品和经营的相似性而使得集群内部企业之间的恶性竞争盛行,甚至出现“劣币驱逐良币”的现象,破坏了竞争规则与市场秩序。也使得集群内的企业滋生创新惰性,严重地削弱了集群的创新能力,降低了集群的集聚效应。凡此种种现象都说明了集群中集聚效应与分散效应的共生性,进入集群中的企业在获得集聚效应带来的额外效益的同时,也面临着这种外部性给企业带来的潜在损失。单个企业进入或退出集群的机制无非是评价进入集群给他带来的额外收益和潜在损失,如果前者大于后者,那么企业就选择进入,集群也就相应地表现为不断地扩张和发展。相反,则企业不会选择进入该集群,甚至该集群内的企业会选择退出。当这成为集群内大多数企业的选择时,也就意味着集群失去了成长的源泉和主体,它将会迅速出现衰退趋势。所以,从该意义上来说,分析单个企业的进退机制:进入集群还是远离集群基本上就等同于分析集群的发展条件和成长边界。集群的边界点就是当外部企业选择进入时可获得的额外收益和潜在损失相等时的那一点,也就是说,对单个企业来说进入与不进入集群不会影响其获利情况。这就意味着集群已不再具有净集聚效应,已经达到了发展的顶峰时期(或者称为成熟期),集群随之停止扩张 。本文试图通过建立一个简单的模型来描述高新技术企业对集群的选择,而该选择的实质是比较进入集群与远离集群两种不同决策之间的经济绩效,并以此来说明高新技术企业集群的发展条件及其边界。最后,本文结合我国具体实际,为促使高科技园区演变成为真正意义上的“集群”,不断吸引企业进入或不断孳生出新的企业,发挥应有的集聚效应提出了相应的对策和建议。本文通过研究和分析得出的主要观点有:1、高新技术企业在区位决策中受传统因素如运输成本等外部变量的约束越来越弱,他们更加注重知识、技术的可获得性,以及创新3氛围和相互交流合作等。而高新技术企业集群所具有的集聚效应就主要体现在这些方面,所以,现代高新技术企业的区位决策必然涉及对集群的选择问题,即高新技术企业要权衡是否进入集群。2、在集群内部不仅存在着集聚效应也存在着分散效应。专业化分工有利于企业获取规模经济、外部经济,从而使得企业在集群内的生产成本要比集群外来得低。但是,专业化分工也可能增加交易的复杂性和不确定性。集群内企业之间以及企业与大学、研究机构之间的非正式合作与交流有利于企业的发展与成长,但企业之间互相学习非常容易导致各自在生产工艺、技术和研发方向上的雷同,从而造成了集群内企业之间的恶性竞争。技术、知识、信息乃至人力资本的自由、快速的流动在充分发挥其作用、社会价值的同时会诱使企业产生“搭便车”心理,创新热情被抑制,形成投资不足,破坏竞争规律与市场秩序,甚至会导致集群出现衰退的现象。3、仅仅是同质企业在地理上的集中并不会给这些企业带来额外的好处。投资的?更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years, clusters are booming over through our country andbecome a main factor to improve economy. So it is necessary to researchhow and why firms gather in clusters in order to show effective policy todevelop clusters or keep it flourish. In this paper, clusters are defined by Porter(1998,p.78) as“geographic concentrations of interconnected firms and institutions in aparticular field which encompass an array of linked industries and otherentities important to competition”. It should be noted that the“interconnected firms and institutions in a particular field” is the centerorganizations and “an array of linked industries and other entities”serve for it in the clusters. As Alfred Marshall said the concentration offirms in close geographical proximity within clusters allowed all firms toenjoy the benefits of economies of scale, external and of technical andorganizational innovations. Some common ground is established in different theories clusters butthe various theoretical approaches draw upon an immensely wide set ofarguments in establishing the advantages to firms locating within a cluster,and the balance between competition and cooperation in the generation ofthese advantages. Majority of theories focus on the agglomeration orcooperation but to some extent, dispersion or competition is now aneglected field. The paper tries to analyze clusters and its boundarythrough a new angle, that is whether the firm will enter into clusters ornot. If the firm chooses locating in cluster it means that clusters areattractive and will progress continuously, vise verse, it will be dead.Finally, we show suggestion and public policy to develop Hi-Tech FirmsParks. The paper is organized as follows. Section one point out what the paper is concerned with and how wearrange the paper. Section two reviews the different theories of clusters. Severaldifferent traditions are identified and criticized, each one pays greatemphasize on different factors to explain what the sources of theadvantages to firms locating within a cluster or why firms might clustertogether. They includes such advantages as transport charges, labor wage,marketing scope, economics of scale, economics of external, cooperation,free liquid of human capital, technological and knowledge innovation.Then we start by classifying above factors to two types, that is, thelocation factors and the agglomeration factors. Through analyzing theHi-Tech firm’ strategy of location, we find that the latter factor is moreimportant. So the main point of Hi-Tech firm strategy of location is thedecision whether entering into the cluster or not. Intuitively, it should be clear that the spatial configuration ofeconomic activities is the outcome of a process involving two opposingtypes of forces, that is, agglomeration forces and dispersion forces. Theobserved spatial configuration of economic activities is then the result ofa complicated balance of the contrary forces. For example, a famousFrench geographer argued that all societies, rudimentary or developed,face the same dilemma: Individuals must get together to benefit from theadvantages of the division of labor, but various difficulties restrict thegathering of many individuals. As Marshall believed the importance oflocalization of production within industrial districts is that, by providingopportunities for entrepreneurs to specialize and for the industrial districtas a whole to secure internal economies of scale and external benefitsdenied to isolated firms, it improves the competitive position ofindividual firms. The response of deepening the organizational division oflabor leads to an increase in the number of formal market transactionsexternal to the firm. There may also be an increase in the unpredictabilityand complexity of transactions. Modern industrial district theoryemphasizes the interdependence of firms, flexible firm boundaries, andthe importance of trust in creating and sustaining collaboration betweeneconomic actors within the districts. The reasoning is that firms withinnetworks of trust benefit f更多还原