传统农区工业化空间分异规律研究
|
摘要
由于中国二元的经济特征，在工业化的内涵和衡量上，国内学者普遍采取二分法。具体说，国内学者与国外学者对工业化内涵的界定普遍认为是全面的结构性变迁过程。而在工业化进程的衡量上，受计划经济时期重工业优先发展和城乡二元管理体制的影响，在相当长时期内经济社会结构的变迁主要体现在工业内部的自循环，作为解释现实的结构性指标，国内学者更多地采用经济发展水平与产业结构来衡量工业化进程。为了全面反映工业化对区域经济社会结构变迁的影响过程，本文在经济发展水平与产业结构的基础上，加入了工业结构、人口的空间结构以及人口的就业领域结构等指标，并利用阶段阈值法对相应指标进行无量纲化处理，采用加法合成法计算了以河南省为代表的传统农区的地区工业化综合指数。结果表明：传统农区工业化的空间结构已经由平面型过渡到金字塔型，并有进一步向橄榄型演变的趋势；经济发展水平与工业结构的贡献均衡程度对区域工业化进程的快慢具有重要影响；采掘业等初级原材料工业支撑的区域更容易导致工业化进程的相对滞后。
从全面结构变迁的角度来看，工业结构尤其是制造业结构的变化对工业化进程的快慢具有重要支撑作用。本文通过计算制造业区位基尼系数进一步验证了制造业性质的空间差异与工业化进程空间分异的一致性：资源型产业由于对劳动力吸纳能力较弱导致其对工业化进程的影响程度较弱；各个区域都有较大需求、产品运输成本相对较低的制造业由于空间集聚程度较弱，其对工业化进程空间分异的影响程度也较弱；只有空间聚集程度相对适中且吸纳劳动力越多的制造业的空间布局才能更好地反映工业化进程的空间分异。
本文试图从全新的角度解释传统农区工业化空间分异的内在机理，传统农区工业化的共性与特殊性就成为分析问题的起点。作为欠发达区域，传统农区的工业化属于次生工业化范畴，其运行机制是以外部先进生产要素体系的引入为前提条件。但是传统农区的工业化又具有自身的特殊性质，这种特殊性主要体现在传统农区工业化首先是在没有资本、技术、区位、政府政策倾斜等优势的区域产生，这与一般的次生工业化区域明显不同。从相对角度来说，外部工业化的生产要素并不会主动融入传统农区的经济社会结构之中，而是通过本地企业家的创业与创新行为被动融入的。本文把这种特殊性称之为“次生中的次生”性质，与此相对应，工业化在空间上的突破就具有相当程度的“内生”性质。工业化水平的高低以及发展速度的快慢取决于传统农区异质性的内部条件与同质的外部工业化环境之间的适应程度，本文进一步把这种适应程度称之为内生能力。本文认为各个区域正是由于内生能力的差异才导致对产业形成与发展具有重要影响的偶然事件向必然事件转化的能力不同，进而导致工业化进程的空间分异。
正是由于传统农区工业化的内生性质与内生能力，一般性的次生工业化理论并不能很好地解释传统农区工业化的空间分异这一现象，本文试图从内生能力的角度把被主流经济学遗忘的市场化条件重新纳入到分析框架之中。但是由于内生能力的影响因素过于复杂，要想把内生能力定量化是非常困难的。本文注意到内生能力是市场化条件的反应，而区域市场化条件与企业家的创业行为以及与此有关的创新行为有很强的正相关关系。因此，本文就用创业行为与创新行为作为衡量区域内生能力的代理指标，并分别用城镇个体和私营企业从业人员比率与每万人拥有的专利申请数量进行度量。分析结果表明，创业行为与创新行为的空间差异有效解释了传统农区工业化的空间分异现象，创业行为与创新行为尤其是创业行为对传统农区工业化空间分异的贡献要远远大于已知的物质资本、人力资本、开放程度等因素的贡献。
根据上述思路，具体章节安排如下：
第一章为引言。主要从选题背景和意义、研究范围的界定，研究思路、研究方法以及创新之处等五个方面进行论述，对本文的相关研究做一概述。
第二章为文献回顾与评述。本章是对已有的相关理论和国内外研究现状进行回顾和评述，主要包括工业化理论与区位理论两个方面。在前人研究的基础上发现问题，寻找解决问题的切入点和突破口，为本文的深入研究奠定坚实的理论基础和提供较为完善的分析框架。
第三章为传统农区工业化概述。本章的主要目的是对传统农区工业化涉及到的相关问题进行概括与归纳，具体包括工业化的运行机制、工业化的模式、工业化进程的影响因素等三个方面。试图从中梳理出传统农区工业化次生中的次生这一特殊性质，为传统农区工业化空间分异的解释寻找分析的切入点。
第四章为传统农区工业化空间分异的综合评价与演变路径。本章主要是对传统农区工业化进程在空间上的分异进行定量分析。为了克服过去工业化衡量标准的结构性扭曲，本章构造了综合衡量工业化进程的评价指标体系：利用人均GDP来衡量经济发展水平，利用三次产业增加值比重来衡量产业结构的变化，利用制造业增加值占总商品生产部门增加值的份额来衡量工业结构的变化，利用人口城镇化率来衡量人口流动的空间结构的变化，利用三次产业就业结构来衡量劳动力就业领域结构的变化。并运用阶段阈值法对指标体系进行无量纲化处理，采用加法合成法测算了以河南省为代表的传统农区的地区工业化综合指数，还原工业化全面的结构性变迁历程。
第五章为传统农区制造业空间聚集的演变趋势与特征研究。上一章的重要结论是经济发展水平与工业结构的贡献均衡程度对区域工业化进程的快慢具有重要影响，也就是说制造业的性质与空间布局最能反映工业化的空间分异现象。为了进一步验证这一判断，本章利用制造业区位基尼系数来衡量二位数制造业在空间上的聚集程度，用制造业区位基尼系数的历史比较来说明制造业在空间上的适应性程度的变化。试图找出制造业的性质与空间聚集程度的特征，最终得出制造业的性质与空间布局对工业化进程的空间分异具有重要影响这一结论。
第六章为内生能力与传统农区工业化空间分异的分析框架。以上两章是对工业化以及支撑工业化的制造业的空间分异进行了定量研究，本章和下一章将为这种空间分异现象提供解释。本章将从传统农区工业化次生中的次生这一特殊性质作为分析问题的切入点，探讨传统农区工业化与一般性的次生工业化之间的异同，并在此基础上得出传统农区工业化具有相当程度的内生性质这一结论。正是由于传统农区工业化的内生性质，其异质的内部条件与同质的外部工业化环境的适应程度就存在很大差异，本文进一步把这种适应程度称之为内生能力。异质的内部条件主要包括交通区位、自然资源、制度环境与社会价值观等四个方面，在外部环境一定的情况下，内生能力就表现为上述四个因素对外部环境的适应过程。内生能力是市场化条件的反映，内生能力的空间差异导致了各个区域对偶然事件向必然事件转化能力的差异。
第七章为内生能力对工业化进程空间分异的实证研究。要想对内生能力进行衡量是非常困难的，由于内生能力与市场化条件紧密联系，本文就用市场化的创业行为和创新行为作为内生能力的代理指标，并用城镇个体与私营企业从业人员比重以及每万人拥有的专利申请数量分别对其进行度量。创业行为与创新行为的空间特征支持以下结论：资源型产业对地区工业化进程的长期影响并不显著；各地都有较大需求、产品运输成本相对较低的制造业对工业化进程的空间分异的影响也不显著；只有空间聚集程度相对适中且吸纳劳动力越多的制造业才对地区工业化进程具有重要影响。计量分析结果也表明，创业行为与创新行为对地区工业化进程的贡献非常显著，尤其是创业行为的贡献要远远大于已知的物质资本、人力资本、开放程度等因素的贡献。
第八章为结论与展望。根据上述各章的分析，对本文的研究结论与主要发现进行归纳总结，提出本文的创新点以及本研究存在的不足与未来研究展望，并为传统农区工业化的可持续发展提供具体的对策和政策建议。
Due to China's dual economic characteristics, domestic scholars have generally adopted thedichotomy on the meaning and measure of industrialization. Specifically, scholars and foreign scholarsgenerally consider the definition of industrial connotation as a comprehensive structural change process. Inthe measure of the process of industrialization, by the impact of heavy industry priority to the developmentduring the planned economy period, and urban and rural dual management system, in a quite long periodsocial structure mainly exhibit industry internal circulation, as the interpretation of practical structuralindex, the domestic scholar use the level of economic development and industrial structure more tomeasure the industrialization process.In order to fully reflect the impact of industrialization on regionaleconomic and social structure changes, on the basis of the level of economic development and industrialstructure, this paper add the industrial structure, the index of the spatial structure of the population and thepopulation of the area of employment structure, and phase threshold corresponding indicatorsdimensionless, additive synthesis method to calculate the composite index of regional industrialization oftraditional agricultural area in Henan. The results show that the spatial structure of the traditionalagricultural areas of industrialization has been changed from the planar transition to the pyramid, and thetrend of further evolution is to the olive, The degree of contribution to a balanced level of economicdevelopment and industrial structure has an important impact on the speed of the process ofindustrialization in the region, the areas supporting by primary raw material industries such as extractiveindustries are more likely to lead the process of industrialization lagged behind.
From the point of view of the comprehensive structural changes, structural changes,especiallyindustrial structure of manufacturing have an important supporting role for the speed of the process ofindustrialization. Further validation of the manufacturing industry by calculating the manufacturinglocation Gini coefficient is the consistency of spatial differences and the process of industrialization of thelabor-intensive manufacturing spatial variation: Resource-based industries due to the absorptive capacity isweak labor result in less impact on the process of industrialization, the differentiation degree of influenceon the process of industrialization of space is also weak. Only the manufacturing space layout which spatial aggregation degree is moderate and absorb the labor force more can reflect the process of industrializationspatial variation better.
This article attempts to explain from a new perspective to traditional farming areas ofindustrialization spatial differentiation reason, commonality and particularity of the industrialization of thetraditional agricultural areas has become the starting point for analysis. As the less developed regions, theindustrialization of the traditional agricultural regions belong to the scope of secondary industrialization,and its operating mechanism is to rely on external factors of production system which is introduced as aprerequisite. However, the industrialization of the traditional agricultural regions has its own special nature,this particularity is mainly reflected in the industrialization of traditional farming areas in the advantages ofthe regional capital, technology, location, government policy tilt, this is significantly different with thegeneral secondary industrialized region. From the relative point of view, the external industrial productionelements will not take the initiative to integrate traditional rural economic and social structure, but by localentrepreneur entrepreneurship and innovation behavior of the passive integration. The special nature of thisis called the “secondary in the secondary” in nature, corresponding with this, the breakthrough ofindustrialization in space has a considerable degree of "endogenous" in nature. Industrialization level anddevelopment speed depends on the speed of tradition farming area heterogeneous internal conditions andexternal environment of industrialization between homogeneous degree of adaptation. This paper furtherput this adaptation called endogenous capability, and that each region is due to endogenous capabilitydifferences led to the formation and development of industry has an important impact on the accident to theinevitable events into different abilities, which led to the industrialization process of the spatialdifferentiation.
Because the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas of the endogenous nature andendogenous capability, general secondary industrialization theory cannot explain well the industrializationof traditional agricultural areas the spatial differentiation of this phenomenon. This article attempts from theendogenous capacity of the perspective of the mainstream economics forgetting to commercialize acondition to into the analytical frame. However, due to the ability of endogenous factors is too complex,both subjective factors and objective conditions, in order to quantification of the endogenous capacity isvery difficult. This article pays attention to the endogenous capacity is the market conditions of the reaction, and the regional market conditions and entrepreneurial behavior and the related innovation behavior hasvery strong positive correlation, this paper use the entrepreneurship and innovation behavior as a measureof regional endogenous capacity of the proxy, and were used to urban individual and private enterprise staffratios and every million people have the patent application quantity measurement. The analysis resultsshow that entrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior effectively explain the industrialized space ofthe traditional agricultural areas on differentiation. The econometric analysis also shows thatentrepreneurial behavior and innovation, especially the contribution of entrepreneurial behavior is fargreater than traditional agricultural areas of industrialization spatial variation of the contribution to theknown physical capital, human capital, openness, and other explanatory variables.
According to this line of thinking, the specific chapter is organized as follows:
The first chapter is an introduction. Mainly from the research background and significance, thescope of the study defined the five aspects of the research ideas, research methods to study the significanceand value are discussed and an overview of this article.
The second chapter is the literature review and comment. This chapter is to review and commenton the existing theory and research status, including the industrialization theory and location theory twoaspects. On the basis of previous studies found the problem, finding a solution to the problem of Entrypoint and breach, in order to provide a solid theoretical foundation and perfect analysis framework.
The third chapter outlines for the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas. The mainpurpose of this chapter is the descriptive summary and induction of the relating issues of theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas, including industrialized operation mechanism, the patternof industrialization, industrialized process and influential factors of three aspects. Attempts to sort out theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas in the secondary secondary special properties and spatialdifferentiation of this fact, for the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas spatial differentiationexplanation for analysis to cut a point, subsequent chapters lay the foundation of analysis.
The fourth chapter is the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas the spatialdifferentiation of the comprehensive evaluation and evolution path. This chapter is mainly about theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas in the process of space used for quantitative analysis fordifferentiation, the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas on the space difference of quantity. In order to overcome the past industrial measure of structural distortions, this article constructs acomprehensive measure of industrialized process evaluation index system: the use of per capita GDP tomeasure the level of economic development, with the three industry increases value proportion to measurethe level of industrial structure, the manufacturing industry increases a value to occupy the total commodityproduction sector to increase the value of the shares to measure industrial structure level, use of populationurbanization rate measured in floating population spatial structure, the three industry employment structureto measure changes in the structure of labour force obtain employment field. And using phase thresholdmethod to index system for dimensionless processing, using additive synthesis method to calculate takingHenan Province as the representative of the traditional agricultural area industrialization comprehensiveindex, reducing industrialized comprehensive structural transformation.
The fifth chapter is the traditional agriculture area manufacturing industry spatial agglomerationdevelopment trend and characteristic research. The important conclusion of the last chapter is the level ofeconomic development and industrial structure contribution of regional balanced degree of the speed ofindustrialized process has important implications, that is the nature of the manufacturing and the spatiallayout can most reflect the spatial differentiation of industrialization. In order to further confirm thisinference, this chapter uses manufacturing base the Buddhist nun coefficient to measure the two digitmanufacturing in space on the degree of aggregation, with manufacturing industry area base the Buddhistnun coefficient history to illustrate manufacturing in space on the degree of adaptability changes. Trying tofind out the nature of the manufacturing industry and space to get together the characteristics of degree, andultimately come to this conclusion that differentiation has an important impact on the nature and spatialdistribution of manufacturing space of the process of industrialization.
The sixth chapter is the endogenous capacity and the industrialization of traditional agriculturalareas spatial analysis framework. The above two chapters have made a quantitative research on theindustrialization and supporting industrial manufacturing space divided differentiation, this and the nextchapter will provide the spatial differentiation phenomenon explanation. This chapter will take theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas of secondary in the secondary this special nature as thebreakthrough point of analysis, analyzing the similarities and differences between the traditional farmingarea industrialization and the general secondary industrialization, and on this basis to draw the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas with a considerable degree of "endogenous" nature.Heterogeneous internal conditions include traffic location, natural resources, environment and social values.From four aspects such as external environment, in certain cases, endogenous capability performes as theprocess of the impact of the above four factors on the external environment. Endogenous capacity is areflection of market conditions; it is precisely because the endogenous capacity of the spatial differencesled to differences in the ability to conversion to the inevitable event in the regions of fortuitous events.
The seventh chapter is the endogenous capacity of the industrialization process of the empiricalstudy on the spatial differentiation.It is very difficul to measure the endogenous ability, due to theendogenous capacity is closely linked with market conditions, the paper will use market-orientedentrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior as the endogenous capacity of proxy indicators,respectively, with the urban individual and privatethe proportion of enterprises employed and the numberof patent applications per million people with respect to their measure. The spatial characteristics ofentrepreneurial behavior and innovation support the following conclusions: long-term effects ofresource-based industries to the regional process of industrialization is not significant; all parts of thegreater demand for differentiation, product transportation costs are relatively low manufacturing space ofthe process of industrializationthe impact is not significant; and farther away from agriculture to absorblabor force and more manufacturing has an important influence on regional industrialization process. Theeconometric analysis also shows that entrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior have verysignificant contribution to regional industrialization process, particularly the contribution of entrepreneurialbehavior is much larger than the contribution of physical capital, human capital, the degree of openness andother factors.
The eighth chapter is the conclusion and discussion. According to the analysis of the abovechapters, on the conclusion of this paper and main findings are summarized, this part puts forward theinnovation point of this article and the shortcomings in the research and prospects for future research, andfor the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas of sustainable development to provide specificcountermeasure and policy proposal.
从全面结构变迁的角度来看，工业结构尤其是制造业结构的变化对工业化进程的快慢具有重要支撑作用。本文通过计算制造业区位基尼系数进一步验证了制造业性质的空间差异与工业化进程空间分异的一致性：资源型产业由于对劳动力吸纳能力较弱导致其对工业化进程的影响程度较弱；各个区域都有较大需求、产品运输成本相对较低的制造业由于空间集聚程度较弱，其对工业化进程空间分异的影响程度也较弱；只有空间聚集程度相对适中且吸纳劳动力越多的制造业的空间布局才能更好地反映工业化进程的空间分异。
本文试图从全新的角度解释传统农区工业化空间分异的内在机理，传统农区工业化的共性与特殊性就成为分析问题的起点。作为欠发达区域，传统农区的工业化属于次生工业化范畴，其运行机制是以外部先进生产要素体系的引入为前提条件。但是传统农区的工业化又具有自身的特殊性质，这种特殊性主要体现在传统农区工业化首先是在没有资本、技术、区位、政府政策倾斜等优势的区域产生，这与一般的次生工业化区域明显不同。从相对角度来说，外部工业化的生产要素并不会主动融入传统农区的经济社会结构之中，而是通过本地企业家的创业与创新行为被动融入的。本文把这种特殊性称之为“次生中的次生”性质，与此相对应，工业化在空间上的突破就具有相当程度的“内生”性质。工业化水平的高低以及发展速度的快慢取决于传统农区异质性的内部条件与同质的外部工业化环境之间的适应程度，本文进一步把这种适应程度称之为内生能力。本文认为各个区域正是由于内生能力的差异才导致对产业形成与发展具有重要影响的偶然事件向必然事件转化的能力不同，进而导致工业化进程的空间分异。
正是由于传统农区工业化的内生性质与内生能力，一般性的次生工业化理论并不能很好地解释传统农区工业化的空间分异这一现象，本文试图从内生能力的角度把被主流经济学遗忘的市场化条件重新纳入到分析框架之中。但是由于内生能力的影响因素过于复杂，要想把内生能力定量化是非常困难的。本文注意到内生能力是市场化条件的反应，而区域市场化条件与企业家的创业行为以及与此有关的创新行为有很强的正相关关系。因此，本文就用创业行为与创新行为作为衡量区域内生能力的代理指标，并分别用城镇个体和私营企业从业人员比率与每万人拥有的专利申请数量进行度量。分析结果表明，创业行为与创新行为的空间差异有效解释了传统农区工业化的空间分异现象，创业行为与创新行为尤其是创业行为对传统农区工业化空间分异的贡献要远远大于已知的物质资本、人力资本、开放程度等因素的贡献。
根据上述思路，具体章节安排如下：
第一章为引言。主要从选题背景和意义、研究范围的界定，研究思路、研究方法以及创新之处等五个方面进行论述，对本文的相关研究做一概述。
第二章为文献回顾与评述。本章是对已有的相关理论和国内外研究现状进行回顾和评述，主要包括工业化理论与区位理论两个方面。在前人研究的基础上发现问题，寻找解决问题的切入点和突破口，为本文的深入研究奠定坚实的理论基础和提供较为完善的分析框架。
第三章为传统农区工业化概述。本章的主要目的是对传统农区工业化涉及到的相关问题进行概括与归纳，具体包括工业化的运行机制、工业化的模式、工业化进程的影响因素等三个方面。试图从中梳理出传统农区工业化次生中的次生这一特殊性质，为传统农区工业化空间分异的解释寻找分析的切入点。
第四章为传统农区工业化空间分异的综合评价与演变路径。本章主要是对传统农区工业化进程在空间上的分异进行定量分析。为了克服过去工业化衡量标准的结构性扭曲，本章构造了综合衡量工业化进程的评价指标体系：利用人均GDP来衡量经济发展水平，利用三次产业增加值比重来衡量产业结构的变化，利用制造业增加值占总商品生产部门增加值的份额来衡量工业结构的变化，利用人口城镇化率来衡量人口流动的空间结构的变化，利用三次产业就业结构来衡量劳动力就业领域结构的变化。并运用阶段阈值法对指标体系进行无量纲化处理，采用加法合成法测算了以河南省为代表的传统农区的地区工业化综合指数，还原工业化全面的结构性变迁历程。
第五章为传统农区制造业空间聚集的演变趋势与特征研究。上一章的重要结论是经济发展水平与工业结构的贡献均衡程度对区域工业化进程的快慢具有重要影响，也就是说制造业的性质与空间布局最能反映工业化的空间分异现象。为了进一步验证这一判断，本章利用制造业区位基尼系数来衡量二位数制造业在空间上的聚集程度，用制造业区位基尼系数的历史比较来说明制造业在空间上的适应性程度的变化。试图找出制造业的性质与空间聚集程度的特征，最终得出制造业的性质与空间布局对工业化进程的空间分异具有重要影响这一结论。
第六章为内生能力与传统农区工业化空间分异的分析框架。以上两章是对工业化以及支撑工业化的制造业的空间分异进行了定量研究，本章和下一章将为这种空间分异现象提供解释。本章将从传统农区工业化次生中的次生这一特殊性质作为分析问题的切入点，探讨传统农区工业化与一般性的次生工业化之间的异同，并在此基础上得出传统农区工业化具有相当程度的内生性质这一结论。正是由于传统农区工业化的内生性质，其异质的内部条件与同质的外部工业化环境的适应程度就存在很大差异，本文进一步把这种适应程度称之为内生能力。异质的内部条件主要包括交通区位、自然资源、制度环境与社会价值观等四个方面，在外部环境一定的情况下，内生能力就表现为上述四个因素对外部环境的适应过程。内生能力是市场化条件的反映，内生能力的空间差异导致了各个区域对偶然事件向必然事件转化能力的差异。
第七章为内生能力对工业化进程空间分异的实证研究。要想对内生能力进行衡量是非常困难的，由于内生能力与市场化条件紧密联系，本文就用市场化的创业行为和创新行为作为内生能力的代理指标，并用城镇个体与私营企业从业人员比重以及每万人拥有的专利申请数量分别对其进行度量。创业行为与创新行为的空间特征支持以下结论：资源型产业对地区工业化进程的长期影响并不显著；各地都有较大需求、产品运输成本相对较低的制造业对工业化进程的空间分异的影响也不显著；只有空间聚集程度相对适中且吸纳劳动力越多的制造业才对地区工业化进程具有重要影响。计量分析结果也表明，创业行为与创新行为对地区工业化进程的贡献非常显著，尤其是创业行为的贡献要远远大于已知的物质资本、人力资本、开放程度等因素的贡献。
第八章为结论与展望。根据上述各章的分析，对本文的研究结论与主要发现进行归纳总结，提出本文的创新点以及本研究存在的不足与未来研究展望，并为传统农区工业化的可持续发展提供具体的对策和政策建议。
Due to China's dual economic characteristics, domestic scholars have generally adopted thedichotomy on the meaning and measure of industrialization. Specifically, scholars and foreign scholarsgenerally consider the definition of industrial connotation as a comprehensive structural change process. Inthe measure of the process of industrialization, by the impact of heavy industry priority to the developmentduring the planned economy period, and urban and rural dual management system, in a quite long periodsocial structure mainly exhibit industry internal circulation, as the interpretation of practical structuralindex, the domestic scholar use the level of economic development and industrial structure more tomeasure the industrialization process.In order to fully reflect the impact of industrialization on regionaleconomic and social structure changes, on the basis of the level of economic development and industrialstructure, this paper add the industrial structure, the index of the spatial structure of the population and thepopulation of the area of employment structure, and phase threshold corresponding indicatorsdimensionless, additive synthesis method to calculate the composite index of regional industrialization oftraditional agricultural area in Henan. The results show that the spatial structure of the traditionalagricultural areas of industrialization has been changed from the planar transition to the pyramid, and thetrend of further evolution is to the olive, The degree of contribution to a balanced level of economicdevelopment and industrial structure has an important impact on the speed of the process ofindustrialization in the region, the areas supporting by primary raw material industries such as extractiveindustries are more likely to lead the process of industrialization lagged behind.
From the point of view of the comprehensive structural changes, structural changes,especiallyindustrial structure of manufacturing have an important supporting role for the speed of the process ofindustrialization. Further validation of the manufacturing industry by calculating the manufacturinglocation Gini coefficient is the consistency of spatial differences and the process of industrialization of thelabor-intensive manufacturing spatial variation: Resource-based industries due to the absorptive capacity isweak labor result in less impact on the process of industrialization, the differentiation degree of influenceon the process of industrialization of space is also weak. Only the manufacturing space layout which spatial aggregation degree is moderate and absorb the labor force more can reflect the process of industrializationspatial variation better.
This article attempts to explain from a new perspective to traditional farming areas ofindustrialization spatial differentiation reason, commonality and particularity of the industrialization of thetraditional agricultural areas has become the starting point for analysis. As the less developed regions, theindustrialization of the traditional agricultural regions belong to the scope of secondary industrialization,and its operating mechanism is to rely on external factors of production system which is introduced as aprerequisite. However, the industrialization of the traditional agricultural regions has its own special nature,this particularity is mainly reflected in the industrialization of traditional farming areas in the advantages ofthe regional capital, technology, location, government policy tilt, this is significantly different with thegeneral secondary industrialized region. From the relative point of view, the external industrial productionelements will not take the initiative to integrate traditional rural economic and social structure, but by localentrepreneur entrepreneurship and innovation behavior of the passive integration. The special nature of thisis called the “secondary in the secondary” in nature, corresponding with this, the breakthrough ofindustrialization in space has a considerable degree of "endogenous" in nature. Industrialization level anddevelopment speed depends on the speed of tradition farming area heterogeneous internal conditions andexternal environment of industrialization between homogeneous degree of adaptation. This paper furtherput this adaptation called endogenous capability, and that each region is due to endogenous capabilitydifferences led to the formation and development of industry has an important impact on the accident to theinevitable events into different abilities, which led to the industrialization process of the spatialdifferentiation.
Because the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas of the endogenous nature andendogenous capability, general secondary industrialization theory cannot explain well the industrializationof traditional agricultural areas the spatial differentiation of this phenomenon. This article attempts from theendogenous capacity of the perspective of the mainstream economics forgetting to commercialize acondition to into the analytical frame. However, due to the ability of endogenous factors is too complex,both subjective factors and objective conditions, in order to quantification of the endogenous capacity isvery difficult. This article pays attention to the endogenous capacity is the market conditions of the reaction, and the regional market conditions and entrepreneurial behavior and the related innovation behavior hasvery strong positive correlation, this paper use the entrepreneurship and innovation behavior as a measureof regional endogenous capacity of the proxy, and were used to urban individual and private enterprise staffratios and every million people have the patent application quantity measurement. The analysis resultsshow that entrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior effectively explain the industrialized space ofthe traditional agricultural areas on differentiation. The econometric analysis also shows thatentrepreneurial behavior and innovation, especially the contribution of entrepreneurial behavior is fargreater than traditional agricultural areas of industrialization spatial variation of the contribution to theknown physical capital, human capital, openness, and other explanatory variables.
According to this line of thinking, the specific chapter is organized as follows:
The first chapter is an introduction. Mainly from the research background and significance, thescope of the study defined the five aspects of the research ideas, research methods to study the significanceand value are discussed and an overview of this article.
The second chapter is the literature review and comment. This chapter is to review and commenton the existing theory and research status, including the industrialization theory and location theory twoaspects. On the basis of previous studies found the problem, finding a solution to the problem of Entrypoint and breach, in order to provide a solid theoretical foundation and perfect analysis framework.
The third chapter outlines for the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas. The mainpurpose of this chapter is the descriptive summary and induction of the relating issues of theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas, including industrialized operation mechanism, the patternof industrialization, industrialized process and influential factors of three aspects. Attempts to sort out theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas in the secondary secondary special properties and spatialdifferentiation of this fact, for the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas spatial differentiationexplanation for analysis to cut a point, subsequent chapters lay the foundation of analysis.
The fourth chapter is the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas the spatialdifferentiation of the comprehensive evaluation and evolution path. This chapter is mainly about theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas in the process of space used for quantitative analysis fordifferentiation, the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas on the space difference of quantity. In order to overcome the past industrial measure of structural distortions, this article constructs acomprehensive measure of industrialized process evaluation index system: the use of per capita GDP tomeasure the level of economic development, with the three industry increases value proportion to measurethe level of industrial structure, the manufacturing industry increases a value to occupy the total commodityproduction sector to increase the value of the shares to measure industrial structure level, use of populationurbanization rate measured in floating population spatial structure, the three industry employment structureto measure changes in the structure of labour force obtain employment field. And using phase thresholdmethod to index system for dimensionless processing, using additive synthesis method to calculate takingHenan Province as the representative of the traditional agricultural area industrialization comprehensiveindex, reducing industrialized comprehensive structural transformation.
The fifth chapter is the traditional agriculture area manufacturing industry spatial agglomerationdevelopment trend and characteristic research. The important conclusion of the last chapter is the level ofeconomic development and industrial structure contribution of regional balanced degree of the speed ofindustrialized process has important implications, that is the nature of the manufacturing and the spatiallayout can most reflect the spatial differentiation of industrialization. In order to further confirm thisinference, this chapter uses manufacturing base the Buddhist nun coefficient to measure the two digitmanufacturing in space on the degree of aggregation, with manufacturing industry area base the Buddhistnun coefficient history to illustrate manufacturing in space on the degree of adaptability changes. Trying tofind out the nature of the manufacturing industry and space to get together the characteristics of degree, andultimately come to this conclusion that differentiation has an important impact on the nature and spatialdistribution of manufacturing space of the process of industrialization.
The sixth chapter is the endogenous capacity and the industrialization of traditional agriculturalareas spatial analysis framework. The above two chapters have made a quantitative research on theindustrialization and supporting industrial manufacturing space divided differentiation, this and the nextchapter will provide the spatial differentiation phenomenon explanation. This chapter will take theindustrialization of traditional agricultural areas of secondary in the secondary this special nature as thebreakthrough point of analysis, analyzing the similarities and differences between the traditional farmingarea industrialization and the general secondary industrialization, and on this basis to draw the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas with a considerable degree of "endogenous" nature.Heterogeneous internal conditions include traffic location, natural resources, environment and social values.From four aspects such as external environment, in certain cases, endogenous capability performes as theprocess of the impact of the above four factors on the external environment. Endogenous capacity is areflection of market conditions; it is precisely because the endogenous capacity of the spatial differencesled to differences in the ability to conversion to the inevitable event in the regions of fortuitous events.
The seventh chapter is the endogenous capacity of the industrialization process of the empiricalstudy on the spatial differentiation.It is very difficul to measure the endogenous ability, due to theendogenous capacity is closely linked with market conditions, the paper will use market-orientedentrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior as the endogenous capacity of proxy indicators,respectively, with the urban individual and privatethe proportion of enterprises employed and the numberof patent applications per million people with respect to their measure. The spatial characteristics ofentrepreneurial behavior and innovation support the following conclusions: long-term effects ofresource-based industries to the regional process of industrialization is not significant; all parts of thegreater demand for differentiation, product transportation costs are relatively low manufacturing space ofthe process of industrializationthe impact is not significant; and farther away from agriculture to absorblabor force and more manufacturing has an important influence on regional industrialization process. Theeconometric analysis also shows that entrepreneurial behavior and innovation behavior have verysignificant contribution to regional industrialization process, particularly the contribution of entrepreneurialbehavior is much larger than the contribution of physical capital, human capital, the degree of openness andother factors.
The eighth chapter is the conclusion and discussion. According to the analysis of the abovechapters, on the conclusion of this paper and main findings are summarized, this part puts forward theinnovation point of this article and the shortcomings in the research and prospects for future research, andfor the industrialization of traditional agricultural areas of sustainable development to provide specificcountermeasure and policy proposal.
引文
①对长垣工业化模式的具体探讨请见耿明斋.欠发达平原农业区工业化道路——长垣县工业化发展模式考察[J].南阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,4(01):26-35；本文第三章亦有对长垣和大周这类区域工业化模式的简要概括。
②“落脚自由”的含义是，这些产业不必因为对特定投入的需求而定位在特定的地区，详见文玫.中国工业在区域上的重新定位和聚集[J].经济研究,2004,2:84-94.
①工业三角区位论模型假定在某一均质的地域范围内，在一定的自然、社会经济条件下，某个工厂企业的原料来自两个地区，它的产品销售到一个市场，那么这个工厂企业的选址就在一个市场地和两个原料地之间构成了一个区位三角形。
②参见宋伟.企业空间演变——基于传统农区工业化的微观分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
①区域性因素用来解释企业是如何布局在指定的某一地点或若干地点，而不是在其他地点；集聚因素用来解释在一定工业区域内厂商为什么会选择集中。
②耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
①也称现代区位论、现代空间结构论等，具体详见耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
①此处部分请参见陈柳钦.克鲁格曼等新经济地理学派对产业集群的有关论述[J].西部商学评论,2009,1:57-73.
②向心力受市场准入效应和生活成本效应影响，而离心力受市场挤出效应影响。
③前向联系和后向联系都是为了分析向心力而提出的。其中前向联系指的是降低了生活成本，有助于劳动力在此区域的集聚；而后向联系指的是区域人口越多则市场越大，市场越大越有助于厂商的选址意愿，提高市场准入。
①温州鹿城制鞋历史可追溯到明朝嘉靖年间作为贡品进贡朝廷；宁波服装可追溯到余姚河姆渡遗址出土的大量文物中；永康五金机械可追溯到“黄帝铸鼎”时期。
②我国学术界把改革开放以来珠江三角洲地区形成的集群看成是通过外部资源进入带动起来的嵌入型集群，而把浙江省一些地区根据传统生产积累形成的集群看成是内生型集群，具体请见金祥荣,朱希伟.专业化产业区的起源与演化——一个历史与理论视角的考察[J].经济研究,2002,8:74-82.
①“某种国际分工模式也许是因为历史上的偶然事件或者这个国家的最初的经济特点所形成的，然后随着生产规模的扩大形成优势的积累使这一国际分工模式得以固定下来。”，详见保罗·克鲁格曼.克鲁格曼国际贸易新理论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
②货币外部性是指生产者彼此之间通过市场所产生的外部性；技术外部性是指纯粹由技术或其他方面的关系而不是由市场机制所产生的外部性。
①马克斯·韦伯在论述资本主义精神的时候说道“不管在什么地方，只要资本主义精神出现并表现出来，它就会创造出自己的资本和货币供给来作为达到自身目的的手段”。请见马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神[M]西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2006.
①吉林大学牡丹园网站：http://bbs.jlu.edu.cn/cgi-bin/bbstcon?board=EC&root=1083121775.
②资源配置有市场和计划两种，只偏重资源配置效率很有可能得出来计划比市场更优越的结论，因为在满足偏好一致性等前提假设下，计划比市场在理论上更能促进资源配置效率的提高。
①水路刚开始的时候需要很大风险，但也能带来超乎想象的利润，相对于未来的利润而言，风险还是比较低的，新航路的开辟印证的就是这个道理。
①数据均来自于《中国统计年鉴2011》.
②亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究（下卷）[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
①吕福新从哲理的角度给出了“企业家是一种特殊的角色人格”的定义，详见吕福新.企业家角色人格——对企业家的哲理思考[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001.
[1] Acs, Z. J., D. B. Audretsch, Innovation and Small Firms [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1990.
[2] Aghion P., Howitt P., A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction [J]. Econometrica,1992,60(02):323-351.
[3] Arthur, W.B., Silicon Valley Location Clusters: Do Increasing Returns imply Monopoly?[J]. Mathematical SocialSciences,1990,19:121-125.
[4] Audretsch, D.B., M. Feldman., R＆D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production [J]. AmericanEconomic Review,1996,86(03):630-640.
[5] Audretsch, D.B., P. Stephan., Company-scientist Locational Links: the Case of Biotechnology [J]. American EconomicReview,1996,86(03):641-652.
[6] Baumol W., Entrepreneurship in Economic Theory [J]. American Economic Review,1968,58(02):64-71.
[7] Baumol W., Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Destructive [J]. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98(05):893-921.
[8] Berkowitz, Daniel, Dejong, David N., Entrepreneurship and Post-socialist Growth [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics＆Statistics,2005,67(01):25-46.
[9] Beugelsdijk S., Noorderhaven N., Entrepreneurial Attitude and Economic Growth: A Cross-section of54Regions [J].Annals of Regional Science,2004,38(02):199-218.
[10] Blanchflower, D.G., Self-employment in OECD countries [J]. Labor Economics,2000,7:471-505.
[11] Boschma, R. A., Lambooy, J. G., Evolutionary Economics and Economic Geography [J]. Journal of EvolutionaryEconomics,1999,9:411-429.
[12] Boschma, R., Looking Through a Window of Locational Opportunity [M]. Rotterdam: Tinbergen Institute,1994.
[13] Carree, M., A. van Stel, R. Thurik, S. Wennekers., Economic development and business ownership: An analysis usingdata of23OECD countries in the period1976-1996[J]. Small Business Economics,2002,19:271-290.
[14] Crafts, N., Venables, A. J., Globalization in History [A]. Geographical Perspective [C]. CEPR Discussion Papers3079,2001.
[15] David B. Audretsch, Max Keilbach, Entrepreneurship capital and regional growth [J]. The Annals of regionalscience2005,39:457-469.
[16] Dixit, A. K., Stiglitz, J. E., Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity [J]. American EconomicReview,1977,67:297-308.
[17] Fan, C., Scott, A. J., Industrial agglomeration and development: A survey of spatial economic issues in East Asia andstatistical analysis of Chinese regions [J]. Economic Geography,2003,79(03).
[18] Ferguson C.H., From the people who brought you vodoo economics [J]. Harvard Business Review,1988,5:1-61.
[19] Fujita, M., A Monopolistic Competition Model of Spatial Agglomeration: Differentiated Product Approach [J].Regional Science and Urban Economics,1988,18:87-124.
[20] Fujita, M., Krugman, P., The New Economic Geography. Past, Present and the Future [J]. Papers in Regional Science,2004,83.139-164.
[21] Fujita, M., Mori T., Structural Stability and Evolution of Urban Systems [J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1997,27:399-442.
[22] Gersbach, H., Schmutzler, A., External Spillovers. Internal Spillovers and the Geography of Production and Innovation[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1999,99:679-696.
[23] Grossman G., Helpman E., Quality Ladders and Product Cycle [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106(02):557-86.
[24] Grossman, G., Helpman, E., Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy [M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,1991.
[25] Hébert R. F., Link A. N., In Search of the Meaning of Entrepreneurship [J]. Small Business Economics,1989,1:39-49.
[26] Helpman, E., Krugman, P., Market structure and Foreign Trade [M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,1985.
[27] Henderson. J, V., Shalizi. Z., Venables. A. J., Geography and Development [J]. Journal of Economic Geography,2001(1).
[28] Humphrey, J., Schmitz, H., The Triple C Approach to Local Industrial Policy [J]. World Development,1996,24(12):1859-1877.
[29] J. Schumpeter., The theory of economic development [M]. Cambridge: Harvard university press,1934.
[30] Jaques-Francois Thisse, Location Theory, Regional Science, Economics [J]. Journal of Regional Science,1987,27(4).
[31] Kirzner I., Competition and Entrepreneurship [M]. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1973.
[32] Krugman, P., Increasing Returns and Economic Geography [J]. Journal of Political Economy,1991,99:483-499.
[33] Lanaspa, L. F., Sanz, F., Multiple Equilibria, Stability, and Asymmetries in Krugman's Core-Periphery Model [J].Papers in Regional Science,2001,80:425-438.
[34] Lazear E., Balanced Skills and Entrepreneurship [J]. American Economic Review,2004,94(02):208-211.
[35] Leff N., Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: the Problem Revisited0[J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1979,17(01):46-64.
[36] Leibenstein, H., Entrepreneurship and Development [J]. American Economic Review,58(02):72-83.
[37] Linghui Tang, Peter E. Koveos., Venture Entrepreneurship, Innovation Entrepreneurship, and Economic Growth [J].Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship,2004,8:161-171.
[38] Losch, A., The Economics of Location [M]. New Haven: Yale University Press,1954.
[39] Martin, P., Ottaviano, G., Growth and Agglomeration [J]. International Economic Review,2001,42(04):947-968.
[40] Martin, R., The New ‘Geographical Turn’ in Economics: Some Critical Reflections [J]. Cambridge Journal ofEconomics,1999,23(02):65-91.
[41] Matsushima, N., Matsumura, T., Mixed Oligopoly and Spatial Agglomeration [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics,2003,36(01):62-87.
[42] Porter, M. E., Clusters and the New Economics of Competition [J]. Harvard Business Review,1998,76(06):77-90.
[43] Romano, A., Passiante. G., Elia, V., Modeling growth clusters in the new Web Economy[C].Proceedings of the45thInternational Conference on Small Business (ICSB) World Conference, Brisbane (Australia)2000,7-10giugno.
[44] Schultz T. W., Investment in Entrepreneurial Ability [J]. Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1980,82:437-448.
[45] Scott, A., Regions and World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production, Competition and Political Order[M]. Oxford University Press,1998.
[46] Venables, A. J., N. limao., Geographical Disadvantage [A]. Heckscher-Ohlin-Von Thunen Model of InternationalSpecialization[C]. World Bank Policy Research Paper, N0.2256,1999.
[47] Venables, A. J., Equilibrium Locations of Vertically linked Industries [J]. International Economic Review,1996,37:341-359.
[48] Wennekers, S., Thurik R. Linking Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth [J]. Small Business Economics,1999,13(01):27-55.
[49] YU, T.F., Entrepreneurship and Economic Development in Hong Kong [M]. Routledge Advances in Asia-PacificBusiness,1997.
[50]阿尔弗雷德·韦伯.工业区位论:区位的纯理论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[51]阿弗里德·马歇尔.经济学原理[M].北京:华夏出版社,2005.
[52]阿瑟·刘易斯.二元经济论[M].北京:北京经济学院出版社,1989.
[53]安虎森,陈明.工业化、城市化进程与我国城市推进的路径选择[J].南开经济研究,2005,1:48-54.
[54]保罗·克鲁格曼.克鲁格曼国际贸易新理论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[55]彼得·尼茨坎普.区域和城市经济学手册(第一卷)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001.
[56]陈飞翔,黎开颜,刘佳.锁定效应与中国地区发展不平衡[J].管理世界,2007,12:8-17.
[57]陈佳贵,黄群慧,钟洪武.中国地区工业化进程的综合评价和特征分析[J].经济研究,2006,6:4-15.
[58]陈抗,Arye L. Hillman,顾清扬.财政集权与地方政府行为变化——从援助之手到攫取之手[J].经济学季刊,2002,2(01):111-130.
[59]陈柳钦.克鲁格曼等新经济地理学派对产业集群的有关论述[J].西部商学评论,2009,1:57-73.
[60]陈平.文明分岔、经济混沌和演化经济动力学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[61]陈文标.论民营企业的企业家精神培育[J].企业研究,2006,4:74-76.
[62]范剑勇.市场一体化、地区专业化与产业集聚趋势[J].中国社会科学,2004,6:39-51.
[63]费尔南·布罗代尔,资本主义的动力[M].北京:三联书店,1997.
[64]费孝通.论小城镇及其它[M].天津:天津人民出版社,1986.
[65]高波,赵奉军.企业家精神的地区差异与经济绩效——基于面板数据的估算[J].山西财经大学学报,2009,31(09):58-63.
[66]高新才,姜安印.转型经济中区域突破现象的制度解释——基于中小企业成长的新视角[J].中国软科学,2005,8:98-103.
[67]高新才,张婷婷.产业区位选择因素研究综述[J].中国流通经济,2009,2:58-61.
[68]耿明斋,李燕燕.中国农区工业化路径研究——以欠发达平原农区为例[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[69]耿明斋.农业区工业化的一般理论分析[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,47(03):1-11.
[70]耿明斋.平原农区工业化道路研究[J].南开经济研究,1996,4:3-9.
[71]耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
[72]耿明斋.欠发达平原农业区工业化道路——长垣县工业化发展模式考察[J].南阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,4(01):26-35.
[73]耿明斋.欠发达平原农业区工业化若干问题研究[J].中州学刊,2004,1:13-16.
[74]郭克莎.中国工业化的进程、问题与出路[J].中国社会科学,2000,3:60-71.
[75]韩兆洲.工业化进程统计测度及实证分析[J].统计研究,2002(10):6-8.
[76]郝寿义.区域经济学原理[M].上海:上海人民出版社,格致出版社,2007.
[77]何伟.新经济地理学研究文献综述[J].经济学动态,2004,7:100-104.
[78]何予平.企业家精神与中国经济增长——基于C-D生产函数的实证研究[J].当代财经,2006,7:95-104.
[79] H·钱纳里,S·鲁宾逊,M·赛尔奎因.工业化和经济增长的比较研究[M].上海:上海三联书店,1989.
[80] H·钱纳里,M·塞尔昆.发展的型式(1950-1970)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1998.
[81]吉利斯,波金斯等.发展经济学[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990.
[82]金祥荣,朱希伟.专业化产业区的起源与演化——一个历史与理论视角的考察[J].经济研究,2002,8:74-82.
[83]经济合作与发展组织.增长的推动力:信息技术、创新和创业精神[M].北京:科学技术文献出版社,2001.
[84]拉坦.诱致性制度变迁理论[A].载科斯,阿尔钦,诺斯等.财产权利和制度变迁——产权学派与新制度经济学派译文集[C].327-370,上海:上海人民出版社,上海三联书店,1994.
[85]李飞,宋玉祥,潘志.老工业基地新型工业化水平评估及发展研究——以辽宁为例[J].经济问题,2009,12:123-125.
[86]李宏彬,李杏,姚先国,张海峰,张俊森.企业家的创业与创新精神对中国经济增长的影响[J].经济研究,2009,10:99-108.
[87]李杰.企业区位选择的影响因素研究综述[J].江汉论坛,2008,8:40-43.
[88]李美洲,韩兆洲.新型工业化进程统计测度及实证分析[J].经济问题探索,2007,6:10-14.
[89]李太平,钟甫宁,顾焕章.衡量产业区域集聚程度的简便方法及其比较[J].统计研究,2007,24(11):64-68.
[90]李涛,周开国,乔根平.企业增长的决定因素——中国经验[J].管理世界,2005,12:116-122.
[91]李小建,葛震远,乔家君.偶然因素对区域经济发展的影响——以河南虞城县稍岗乡为例[J].人文地理,2000,12:1-4.
[92]李晓敏.制度质量与企业家活动配置——对鲍莫尔理论的经验检验[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2011,1:135-140.
[93]李杏.企业家精神对中国经济增长的作用研究——基于SYS－GMM的实证研究[J].科研管理,2011,32(01):97-104.
[94]联合国工业发展组织.世界各国工业化概况和趋向[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1980.
[95]梁琦.中国工业的区位基尼系数——兼论外商直接投资对制造业集聚的影响[J].统计研究,2003,9:21-25.
[96]林毅夫,蔡昉,李周.中国的奇迹:发展战略与经济改革[M].上海:上海人民出版社,上海三联书店,1994.
[97]林毅夫.后发优势与后发劣势——与杨小凯教授商榷[J].经济学(季刊),2003,2(04):989-1004.
[98]林毅夫.李约瑟之谜、韦伯疑问和中国的奇迹——自宋以来的长期经济发展[J].北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,44(04):5-22.
[99]林毅夫.自生能力、经济发展与转型——理论与实证[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004年.
[100]刘安国,杨开忠.新经济地理学理论与模型评介[J].经济学动态,2001,12:67-72.
[101]刘东勋.河南工业化水平评价及应采取的工业化战略[J].企业活力,2004,7:4-5.
[102]刘东勋.内陆欠发达传统农业区的经济发展模式——一个基于比较优势的开放增长分析框架[J].南开经济研究,2004,3:16-21.
[103]刘军,徐康宁.产业聚集、工业化水平与区域差异——基于中国省级面板数据的实证研究[J].财经科学,2010,10:65-72.
[104]刘军,徐康宁.产业聚集在工业化进程及空间演化中的作用[J].中国工业经济,2008,9:37-45.
[105]刘明慧.现代企业制度概论[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[106]刘树成,张晓晶.中国经济持续高增长的特点和地区间经济差异的缩小[J].经济研究,2007,10:17-31.
[107]刘小玄,韩朝华.中国的古典企业模式:企业家的企业——江苏阳光集团案例研究[J].管理世界,1999,6:179-189.
[108]刘小玄.中国转轨过程中的企业行为和市场均衡[J].中国社会科学,2003,2:61-71.
[109]鲁传一,李子奈.企业家精神与经济增长理论[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,15(03):42-49.
[110]鲁道夫·吕贝尔特,工业化史[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1983.
[111]罗军.传统农区产业集群形成与演化[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[112]罗时法.分工理论从亚当·斯密到马克思——兼论少数民族贫困的一个重要原因[J].黔南民族师专学报(哲学社会科学版),1994,1:1-6.
[113]罗斯托.经济增长的阶段:非共产党宣言[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[114]罗文.湖南工业结构及其工业化水平研究[J].经济地理,2001,21(02):177-181.
[115]马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2006.
[116]马克斯·韦伯.经济与社会[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[117]麦迪森.世界经济二百年回顾[M].北京:改革出版社,1996.
[118]奈特.风险、不确定性和利润[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[119]欧雪银.企业家精神理论研究新进展[J].经济学动态,2009,8:98-102.
[120]任保平,洪银兴.发展经济学的工业化理论述评[J].学术月刊,2004,4:43-49.
[121]石秀印.中国企业家成功的社会网络基础[J].管理世界,1998,6:187-196.
[122]宋丙涛.财政效率、政府作用与欠发达地区工业经济发展[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,47(05):22-32.
[123]宋丙涛.财政制度变迁与现代经济发展——英国之谜的财政效率解释[D].开封:河南大学,2007.
[124]宋丙涛.财政制度变迁与现代经济革命[J].中国经济问题,2007,(05):28-33.
[125]宋丙涛.市场革命与产业革命演变路径探析[J].现代财经,2006,26(03):75-80.
[126]宋伟.企业空间演变——基于传统农区工业化的微观分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[127]孙早,刘庆岩.市场环境、企业家能力与企业绩效[J].经济学家,2006,4:110-117.
[128]汤普森.中世纪经济社会史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
[129]田凤岐.区位选择理论综述[J].辽宁行政学院学报,2006,8(12):57-59.
[130]涂妍,陈文福.古典区位论到新古典区位论:一个综述[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,30(05):38-42.
[131]汪晓昀,吴纪宁.新型工业化综合评价指标体系设计研究[J].财经理论与实践,2006,6:122-124.
[132]王辉堂,王琦.产业转移理论述评及其发展趋向[J].经济问题探索,2008,1:45-48.
[133]王缉慈.创新的空间:企业集群与区域发展[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
[134]王珺.衍生型集群:珠江三角洲西岸地区产业集群生成机制研究[J].管理世界,2005,8:80-86.
[135]王雷.东西部区域工业化差异的原因及对策[J].重庆邮电学院学报(社会科学版),2006,2:183-186.
[136]王理.欠发达平原农业区工业化过程中企业家生成机制探讨——以长垣县为例[J].南阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,4(01):36-41.
[137]王理.制度转型与传统农区工业化[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[138]王敏正.中国内生性工业化道路研究——兼论大国工业化模式[M].北京:人民出版社,2009.
[139]王淑莉.新经济地理与区域经济学研究述评——以区域为例[J].广西社会科学,2006,6:43-47.
[140]王卫东.区域工业化发展阶段的实证分析——以宁波市为例[J].特区经济,2007,3:55-57.
[141]王延中.环渤海地区工业化水平研究[J].天津社会科学,2007,5:70-77.
[142]威廉·哈勒根,张军.转轨国家的初始条件、改革速度与经济增长[J].经济研究,1999,10:69-74.
[143]卫龙宝,阮建青.产业集群与企业家才能——基于濮院羊毛衫产业的案例研究[J].浙江社会科学,2009,7:25-31.
[144]魏后凯,陈耀.中国西部工业化与软环境建设[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,2003.
[145]文玫.中国工业在区域上的重新定位和聚集[J].经济研究,2004,2:84-94.
[146]吴义爽.制度安排、企业家才能配置与中国持续经济增长[J].理论探讨,2010,1:74-77.
[147]伍云长.工业化发展模式比较[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),1990,1:72-79.
[148]西奥多·W·舒尔茨.改造传统农业[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[149]西蒙·库兹涅茨.各国的经济增长[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[150]项国鹏,李武杰,肖建忠.转型经济中的企业家制度能力:中国企业家的实证研究及其启示[J].管理世界,2009,11:103-114.
[151]徐兰伏.工业区位三角形图的判读方法与训练[J].地理教育,2006,1:49.
[152]亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究[M].北京:商务印书馆.1979.
[153]亚历山大·格申克龙.经济落后的历史透视[M].北京:商务印书馆,2009.
[154]颜双波.我国工业化进程的区域比较与分析[J].中共福建省委党校学报,2010,8:61-65.
[155]杨海军,肖灵机,邹泽清.工业化阶段的判断标准:霍夫曼系数法的缺陷及其修正——以江西、江苏为例的分析[J].财经论丛,2008,2:7-14.
[156]杨宇,郑垂勇.企业家精神和区域经济增长的典型相关分析[J].工业技术经济,2007,26(03):114-116.
[157]姚洋.高水平陷阱——李约瑟之谜再考察[J].经济研究,2003,1:71-79.
[158]叶勤.企业家精神的兴起对美国经济增长的促进作用及其启示[J].外国经济与管理,2000,10:16-20.
[159]雍红月,李松林.谈工业化概念及工业化阶段的划分标准[J].内蒙古统计,2002,2:36-38.
[160]于谦.内生增长理论对我国农业现代化的启示[J].科技管理研究,2010,7:216-223.
[161]袁天凤,刘晓鹰,杨军.中国西部工业化进程与继续工业化途径——基于四川的实证分析[J].经济体制改革,2010,4:141-145.
[162]袁正.分工的一般理论与古典增长框架[J].经济学家,2005,6:103-108.
[163]约翰·冯·杜能.孤立国同农业和国民经济的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[164]约翰·科迪.发展中国家的工业发展政策[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1990.
[165]约翰·伊特韦尔,默里·米尔盖特,彼得·纽曼.新帕尔格雷夫大词典[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1996.
[166]约瑟夫·熊彼特.经济发展理论——对于利润、资本、信贷、利息和经济周期的考察[M].北京:商务印书馆,1990.
[167]张建军,张志学.中国民营企业家的政治战略[J].管理世界,2005,7:94-105.
[168]张建君.发展模式和经济平等——苏南和温州的比较[J].管理世界,2006,8:36-46.
[169]张林,刘继生.信息时代区位论发展的新趋势[J].经济地理,2006,26(02):181-185.
[170]张培刚.发展经济学教程(修订版)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2007.
[171]张培刚.农业与工业化(上卷)[M].武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2002.
[172]张同升,梁进社,宋金平.中国制造业省区间分布的集中与分散研究[J].经济地理,2005,25(03):315-319.
[173]张伟,周鲁柱.区域新型工业化的理论基础、水平测度与促进措施[J].求索,2006,6:6-9.
[174]张文忠,张军涛.经济学和地理学对区位论发展轨迹的影响[J].地理科学进展,1999,18(01):54-59.
[175]张燕.西方区域经济理论综述[J].当代财经,2003,12:86-88.
[176]张燕韡.农村工业化模式演变与城镇化路径选择[J].经济问题探索,2007,7:38-42.
[177]张迎春,李萍.企业家创新能力对区域经济增长的贡献分析——以辽宁省为例[J].财经问题研究,2006,9:92-96.
[178]赵奉军,高波.创业精神与经济发展的U型关系及其检验[J].经济管理,2009,4:35-40.
[179]赵伟,黄先海.外部约束:中国两种工业化区域模式扩散的主要障碍[J].中国工业经济,1997,11:49-53.
[180]赵伟.工业化与城市化:沿海三大区域模式及其演化机理分析[J].社会科学战线,2009,11:74-81.
[181]中国企业家调查系统.市场化改革与中国企业家成长——2008·中国企业家队伍成长与发展15年调查综合报告(下)[J].管理世界,2008,12:103-113.
[182]中国企业家调查系统.中国企业家队伍成长现状与环境评价——2003年中国企业经营者成长与发展专题调查报告[J].管理世界,2003,7:110-119.
[183]钟宁桦.农村工业化还能走多远?[J].经济研究,2011,1:18-27.
[184]周金泉,刘兆峰,邓增永.企业家理论问题探究[J].山西财经大学学报,2004,26(06):21-25.
[185]周叔莲,郭克莎.中国工业增长与结构变动研究[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2000.
[186]周文,李晓红.中国经济转型中的企业成长——基于分工与信任的视角[J].管理世界,2009,12:180-181.
[187]朱应皋,王遐见.中国经济发达地区工业化水平探析——江苏工业化发展水平的个案研究[J].当代经济研究,2002,3:21-25.
[188]庄子银.南方模仿、企业家精神和长期增长[J].经济研究,2003,1:62-70.
[189]庄子银.企业家精神、持续技术创新和长期经济增长的微观机制[J].世界经济,2005,12:32-43.
②“落脚自由”的含义是，这些产业不必因为对特定投入的需求而定位在特定的地区，详见文玫.中国工业在区域上的重新定位和聚集[J].经济研究,2004,2:84-94.
①工业三角区位论模型假定在某一均质的地域范围内，在一定的自然、社会经济条件下，某个工厂企业的原料来自两个地区，它的产品销售到一个市场，那么这个工厂企业的选址就在一个市场地和两个原料地之间构成了一个区位三角形。
②参见宋伟.企业空间演变——基于传统农区工业化的微观分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
①区域性因素用来解释企业是如何布局在指定的某一地点或若干地点，而不是在其他地点；集聚因素用来解释在一定工业区域内厂商为什么会选择集中。
②耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
①也称现代区位论、现代空间结构论等，具体详见耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
①此处部分请参见陈柳钦.克鲁格曼等新经济地理学派对产业集群的有关论述[J].西部商学评论,2009,1:57-73.
②向心力受市场准入效应和生活成本效应影响，而离心力受市场挤出效应影响。
③前向联系和后向联系都是为了分析向心力而提出的。其中前向联系指的是降低了生活成本，有助于劳动力在此区域的集聚；而后向联系指的是区域人口越多则市场越大，市场越大越有助于厂商的选址意愿，提高市场准入。
①温州鹿城制鞋历史可追溯到明朝嘉靖年间作为贡品进贡朝廷；宁波服装可追溯到余姚河姆渡遗址出土的大量文物中；永康五金机械可追溯到“黄帝铸鼎”时期。
②我国学术界把改革开放以来珠江三角洲地区形成的集群看成是通过外部资源进入带动起来的嵌入型集群，而把浙江省一些地区根据传统生产积累形成的集群看成是内生型集群，具体请见金祥荣,朱希伟.专业化产业区的起源与演化——一个历史与理论视角的考察[J].经济研究,2002,8:74-82.
①“某种国际分工模式也许是因为历史上的偶然事件或者这个国家的最初的经济特点所形成的，然后随着生产规模的扩大形成优势的积累使这一国际分工模式得以固定下来。”，详见保罗·克鲁格曼.克鲁格曼国际贸易新理论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
②货币外部性是指生产者彼此之间通过市场所产生的外部性；技术外部性是指纯粹由技术或其他方面的关系而不是由市场机制所产生的外部性。
①马克斯·韦伯在论述资本主义精神的时候说道“不管在什么地方，只要资本主义精神出现并表现出来，它就会创造出自己的资本和货币供给来作为达到自身目的的手段”。请见马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神[M]西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2006.
①吉林大学牡丹园网站：http://bbs.jlu.edu.cn/cgi-bin/bbstcon?board=EC&root=1083121775.
②资源配置有市场和计划两种，只偏重资源配置效率很有可能得出来计划比市场更优越的结论，因为在满足偏好一致性等前提假设下，计划比市场在理论上更能促进资源配置效率的提高。
①水路刚开始的时候需要很大风险，但也能带来超乎想象的利润，相对于未来的利润而言，风险还是比较低的，新航路的开辟印证的就是这个道理。
①数据均来自于《中国统计年鉴2011》.
②亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究（下卷）[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
①吕福新从哲理的角度给出了“企业家是一种特殊的角色人格”的定义，详见吕福新.企业家角色人格——对企业家的哲理思考[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001.
[1] Acs, Z. J., D. B. Audretsch, Innovation and Small Firms [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1990.
[2] Aghion P., Howitt P., A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction [J]. Econometrica,1992,60(02):323-351.
[3] Arthur, W.B., Silicon Valley Location Clusters: Do Increasing Returns imply Monopoly?[J]. Mathematical SocialSciences,1990,19:121-125.
[4] Audretsch, D.B., M. Feldman., R＆D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production [J]. AmericanEconomic Review,1996,86(03):630-640.
[5] Audretsch, D.B., P. Stephan., Company-scientist Locational Links: the Case of Biotechnology [J]. American EconomicReview,1996,86(03):641-652.
[6] Baumol W., Entrepreneurship in Economic Theory [J]. American Economic Review,1968,58(02):64-71.
[7] Baumol W., Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Destructive [J]. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98(05):893-921.
[8] Berkowitz, Daniel, Dejong, David N., Entrepreneurship and Post-socialist Growth [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics＆Statistics,2005,67(01):25-46.
[9] Beugelsdijk S., Noorderhaven N., Entrepreneurial Attitude and Economic Growth: A Cross-section of54Regions [J].Annals of Regional Science,2004,38(02):199-218.
[10] Blanchflower, D.G., Self-employment in OECD countries [J]. Labor Economics,2000,7:471-505.
[11] Boschma, R. A., Lambooy, J. G., Evolutionary Economics and Economic Geography [J]. Journal of EvolutionaryEconomics,1999,9:411-429.
[12] Boschma, R., Looking Through a Window of Locational Opportunity [M]. Rotterdam: Tinbergen Institute,1994.
[13] Carree, M., A. van Stel, R. Thurik, S. Wennekers., Economic development and business ownership: An analysis usingdata of23OECD countries in the period1976-1996[J]. Small Business Economics,2002,19:271-290.
[14] Crafts, N., Venables, A. J., Globalization in History [A]. Geographical Perspective [C]. CEPR Discussion Papers3079,2001.
[15] David B. Audretsch, Max Keilbach, Entrepreneurship capital and regional growth [J]. The Annals of regionalscience2005,39:457-469.
[16] Dixit, A. K., Stiglitz, J. E., Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity [J]. American EconomicReview,1977,67:297-308.
[17] Fan, C., Scott, A. J., Industrial agglomeration and development: A survey of spatial economic issues in East Asia andstatistical analysis of Chinese regions [J]. Economic Geography,2003,79(03).
[18] Ferguson C.H., From the people who brought you vodoo economics [J]. Harvard Business Review,1988,5:1-61.
[19] Fujita, M., A Monopolistic Competition Model of Spatial Agglomeration: Differentiated Product Approach [J].Regional Science and Urban Economics,1988,18:87-124.
[20] Fujita, M., Krugman, P., The New Economic Geography. Past, Present and the Future [J]. Papers in Regional Science,2004,83.139-164.
[21] Fujita, M., Mori T., Structural Stability and Evolution of Urban Systems [J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1997,27:399-442.
[22] Gersbach, H., Schmutzler, A., External Spillovers. Internal Spillovers and the Geography of Production and Innovation[J]. Regional Science and Urban Economics,1999,99:679-696.
[23] Grossman G., Helpman E., Quality Ladders and Product Cycle [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106(02):557-86.
[24] Grossman, G., Helpman, E., Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy [M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,1991.
[25] Hébert R. F., Link A. N., In Search of the Meaning of Entrepreneurship [J]. Small Business Economics,1989,1:39-49.
[26] Helpman, E., Krugman, P., Market structure and Foreign Trade [M]. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,1985.
[27] Henderson. J, V., Shalizi. Z., Venables. A. J., Geography and Development [J]. Journal of Economic Geography,2001(1).
[28] Humphrey, J., Schmitz, H., The Triple C Approach to Local Industrial Policy [J]. World Development,1996,24(12):1859-1877.
[29] J. Schumpeter., The theory of economic development [M]. Cambridge: Harvard university press,1934.
[30] Jaques-Francois Thisse, Location Theory, Regional Science, Economics [J]. Journal of Regional Science,1987,27(4).
[31] Kirzner I., Competition and Entrepreneurship [M]. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1973.
[32] Krugman, P., Increasing Returns and Economic Geography [J]. Journal of Political Economy,1991,99:483-499.
[33] Lanaspa, L. F., Sanz, F., Multiple Equilibria, Stability, and Asymmetries in Krugman's Core-Periphery Model [J].Papers in Regional Science,2001,80:425-438.
[34] Lazear E., Balanced Skills and Entrepreneurship [J]. American Economic Review,2004,94(02):208-211.
[35] Leff N., Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: the Problem Revisited0[J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1979,17(01):46-64.
[36] Leibenstein, H., Entrepreneurship and Development [J]. American Economic Review,58(02):72-83.
[37] Linghui Tang, Peter E. Koveos., Venture Entrepreneurship, Innovation Entrepreneurship, and Economic Growth [J].Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship,2004,8:161-171.
[38] Losch, A., The Economics of Location [M]. New Haven: Yale University Press,1954.
[39] Martin, P., Ottaviano, G., Growth and Agglomeration [J]. International Economic Review,2001,42(04):947-968.
[40] Martin, R., The New ‘Geographical Turn’ in Economics: Some Critical Reflections [J]. Cambridge Journal ofEconomics,1999,23(02):65-91.
[41] Matsushima, N., Matsumura, T., Mixed Oligopoly and Spatial Agglomeration [J]. Canadian Journal of Economics,2003,36(01):62-87.
[42] Porter, M. E., Clusters and the New Economics of Competition [J]. Harvard Business Review,1998,76(06):77-90.
[43] Romano, A., Passiante. G., Elia, V., Modeling growth clusters in the new Web Economy[C].Proceedings of the45thInternational Conference on Small Business (ICSB) World Conference, Brisbane (Australia)2000,7-10giugno.
[44] Schultz T. W., Investment in Entrepreneurial Ability [J]. Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1980,82:437-448.
[45] Scott, A., Regions and World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production, Competition and Political Order[M]. Oxford University Press,1998.
[46] Venables, A. J., N. limao., Geographical Disadvantage [A]. Heckscher-Ohlin-Von Thunen Model of InternationalSpecialization[C]. World Bank Policy Research Paper, N0.2256,1999.
[47] Venables, A. J., Equilibrium Locations of Vertically linked Industries [J]. International Economic Review,1996,37:341-359.
[48] Wennekers, S., Thurik R. Linking Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth [J]. Small Business Economics,1999,13(01):27-55.
[49] YU, T.F., Entrepreneurship and Economic Development in Hong Kong [M]. Routledge Advances in Asia-PacificBusiness,1997.
[50]阿尔弗雷德·韦伯.工业区位论:区位的纯理论[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[51]阿弗里德·马歇尔.经济学原理[M].北京:华夏出版社,2005.
[52]阿瑟·刘易斯.二元经济论[M].北京:北京经济学院出版社,1989.
[53]安虎森,陈明.工业化、城市化进程与我国城市推进的路径选择[J].南开经济研究,2005,1:48-54.
[54]保罗·克鲁格曼.克鲁格曼国际贸易新理论[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[55]彼得·尼茨坎普.区域和城市经济学手册(第一卷)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2001.
[56]陈飞翔,黎开颜,刘佳.锁定效应与中国地区发展不平衡[J].管理世界,2007,12:8-17.
[57]陈佳贵,黄群慧,钟洪武.中国地区工业化进程的综合评价和特征分析[J].经济研究,2006,6:4-15.
[58]陈抗,Arye L. Hillman,顾清扬.财政集权与地方政府行为变化——从援助之手到攫取之手[J].经济学季刊,2002,2(01):111-130.
[59]陈柳钦.克鲁格曼等新经济地理学派对产业集群的有关论述[J].西部商学评论,2009,1:57-73.
[60]陈平.文明分岔、经济混沌和演化经济动力学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
[61]陈文标.论民营企业的企业家精神培育[J].企业研究,2006,4:74-76.
[62]范剑勇.市场一体化、地区专业化与产业集聚趋势[J].中国社会科学,2004,6:39-51.
[63]费尔南·布罗代尔,资本主义的动力[M].北京:三联书店,1997.
[64]费孝通.论小城镇及其它[M].天津:天津人民出版社,1986.
[65]高波,赵奉军.企业家精神的地区差异与经济绩效——基于面板数据的估算[J].山西财经大学学报,2009,31(09):58-63.
[66]高新才,姜安印.转型经济中区域突破现象的制度解释——基于中小企业成长的新视角[J].中国软科学,2005,8:98-103.
[67]高新才,张婷婷.产业区位选择因素研究综述[J].中国流通经济,2009,2:58-61.
[68]耿明斋,李燕燕.中国农区工业化路径研究——以欠发达平原农区为例[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[69]耿明斋.农业区工业化的一般理论分析[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,47(03):1-11.
[70]耿明斋.平原农区工业化道路研究[J].南开经济研究,1996,4:3-9.
[71]耿明斋.欠发达平原农区经济发展与制度转型——整体考察与个案分析[M].郑州:河南人民出版社,2006.
[72]耿明斋.欠发达平原农业区工业化道路——长垣县工业化发展模式考察[J].南阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,4(01):26-35.
[73]耿明斋.欠发达平原农业区工业化若干问题研究[J].中州学刊,2004,1:13-16.
[74]郭克莎.中国工业化的进程、问题与出路[J].中国社会科学,2000,3:60-71.
[75]韩兆洲.工业化进程统计测度及实证分析[J].统计研究,2002(10):6-8.
[76]郝寿义.区域经济学原理[M].上海:上海人民出版社,格致出版社,2007.
[77]何伟.新经济地理学研究文献综述[J].经济学动态,2004,7:100-104.
[78]何予平.企业家精神与中国经济增长——基于C-D生产函数的实证研究[J].当代财经,2006,7:95-104.
[79] H·钱纳里,S·鲁宾逊,M·赛尔奎因.工业化和经济增长的比较研究[M].上海:上海三联书店,1989.
[80] H·钱纳里,M·塞尔昆.发展的型式(1950-1970)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1998.
[81]吉利斯,波金斯等.发展经济学[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990.
[82]金祥荣,朱希伟.专业化产业区的起源与演化——一个历史与理论视角的考察[J].经济研究,2002,8:74-82.
[83]经济合作与发展组织.增长的推动力:信息技术、创新和创业精神[M].北京:科学技术文献出版社,2001.
[84]拉坦.诱致性制度变迁理论[A].载科斯,阿尔钦,诺斯等.财产权利和制度变迁——产权学派与新制度经济学派译文集[C].327-370,上海:上海人民出版社,上海三联书店,1994.
[85]李飞,宋玉祥,潘志.老工业基地新型工业化水平评估及发展研究——以辽宁为例[J].经济问题,2009,12:123-125.
[86]李宏彬,李杏,姚先国,张海峰,张俊森.企业家的创业与创新精神对中国经济增长的影响[J].经济研究,2009,10:99-108.
[87]李杰.企业区位选择的影响因素研究综述[J].江汉论坛,2008,8:40-43.
[88]李美洲,韩兆洲.新型工业化进程统计测度及实证分析[J].经济问题探索,2007,6:10-14.
[89]李太平,钟甫宁,顾焕章.衡量产业区域集聚程度的简便方法及其比较[J].统计研究,2007,24(11):64-68.
[90]李涛,周开国,乔根平.企业增长的决定因素——中国经验[J].管理世界,2005,12:116-122.
[91]李小建,葛震远,乔家君.偶然因素对区域经济发展的影响——以河南虞城县稍岗乡为例[J].人文地理,2000,12:1-4.
[92]李晓敏.制度质量与企业家活动配置——对鲍莫尔理论的经验检验[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2011,1:135-140.
[93]李杏.企业家精神对中国经济增长的作用研究——基于SYS－GMM的实证研究[J].科研管理,2011,32(01):97-104.
[94]联合国工业发展组织.世界各国工业化概况和趋向[M].北京:中国对外翻译出版公司,1980.
[95]梁琦.中国工业的区位基尼系数——兼论外商直接投资对制造业集聚的影响[J].统计研究,2003,9:21-25.
[96]林毅夫,蔡昉,李周.中国的奇迹:发展战略与经济改革[M].上海:上海人民出版社,上海三联书店,1994.
[97]林毅夫.后发优势与后发劣势——与杨小凯教授商榷[J].经济学(季刊),2003,2(04):989-1004.
[98]林毅夫.李约瑟之谜、韦伯疑问和中国的奇迹——自宋以来的长期经济发展[J].北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,44(04):5-22.
[99]林毅夫.自生能力、经济发展与转型——理论与实证[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2004年.
[100]刘安国,杨开忠.新经济地理学理论与模型评介[J].经济学动态,2001,12:67-72.
[101]刘东勋.河南工业化水平评价及应采取的工业化战略[J].企业活力,2004,7:4-5.
[102]刘东勋.内陆欠发达传统农业区的经济发展模式——一个基于比较优势的开放增长分析框架[J].南开经济研究,2004,3:16-21.
[103]刘军,徐康宁.产业聚集、工业化水平与区域差异——基于中国省级面板数据的实证研究[J].财经科学,2010,10:65-72.
[104]刘军,徐康宁.产业聚集在工业化进程及空间演化中的作用[J].中国工业经济,2008,9:37-45.
[105]刘明慧.现代企业制度概论[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,2005.
[106]刘树成,张晓晶.中国经济持续高增长的特点和地区间经济差异的缩小[J].经济研究,2007,10:17-31.
[107]刘小玄,韩朝华.中国的古典企业模式:企业家的企业——江苏阳光集团案例研究[J].管理世界,1999,6:179-189.
[108]刘小玄.中国转轨过程中的企业行为和市场均衡[J].中国社会科学,2003,2:61-71.
[109]鲁传一,李子奈.企业家精神与经济增长理论[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,15(03):42-49.
[110]鲁道夫·吕贝尔特,工业化史[M].上海:上海译文出版社,1983.
[111]罗军.传统农区产业集群形成与演化[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[112]罗时法.分工理论从亚当·斯密到马克思——兼论少数民族贫困的一个重要原因[J].黔南民族师专学报(哲学社会科学版),1994,1:1-6.
[113]罗斯托.经济增长的阶段:非共产党宣言[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001.
[114]罗文.湖南工业结构及其工业化水平研究[J].经济地理,2001,21(02):177-181.
[115]马克斯·韦伯.新教伦理与资本主义精神[M].西安:陕西师范大学出版社,2006.
[116]马克斯·韦伯.经济与社会[M].北京:商务印书馆,1996.
[117]麦迪森.世界经济二百年回顾[M].北京:改革出版社,1996.
[118]奈特.风险、不确定性和利润[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2005.
[119]欧雪银.企业家精神理论研究新进展[J].经济学动态,2009,8:98-102.
[120]任保平,洪银兴.发展经济学的工业化理论述评[J].学术月刊,2004,4:43-49.
[121]石秀印.中国企业家成功的社会网络基础[J].管理世界,1998,6:187-196.
[122]宋丙涛.财政效率、政府作用与欠发达地区工业经济发展[J].河南大学学报(社会科学版),2007,47(05):22-32.
[123]宋丙涛.财政制度变迁与现代经济发展——英国之谜的财政效率解释[D].开封:河南大学,2007.
[124]宋丙涛.财政制度变迁与现代经济革命[J].中国经济问题,2007,(05):28-33.
[125]宋丙涛.市场革命与产业革命演变路径探析[J].现代财经,2006,26(03):75-80.
[126]宋伟.企业空间演变——基于传统农区工业化的微观分析[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2010.
[127]孙早,刘庆岩.市场环境、企业家能力与企业绩效[J].经济学家,2006,4:110-117.
[128]汤普森.中世纪经济社会史[M].北京:商务印书馆,1983.
[129]田凤岐.区位选择理论综述[J].辽宁行政学院学报,2006,8(12):57-59.
[130]涂妍,陈文福.古典区位论到新古典区位论:一个综述[J].河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,30(05):38-42.
[131]汪晓昀,吴纪宁.新型工业化综合评价指标体系设计研究[J].财经理论与实践,2006,6:122-124.
[132]王辉堂,王琦.产业转移理论述评及其发展趋向[J].经济问题探索,2008,1:45-48.
[133]王缉慈.创新的空间:企业集群与区域发展[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
[134]王珺.衍生型集群:珠江三角洲西岸地区产业集群生成机制研究[J].管理世界,2005,8:80-86.
[135]王雷.东西部区域工业化差异的原因及对策[J].重庆邮电学院学报(社会科学版),2006,2:183-186.
[136]王理.欠发达平原农业区工业化过程中企业家生成机制探讨——以长垣县为例[J].南阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2005,4(01):36-41.
[137]王理.制度转型与传统农区工业化[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2009.
[138]王敏正.中国内生性工业化道路研究——兼论大国工业化模式[M].北京:人民出版社,2009.
[139]王淑莉.新经济地理与区域经济学研究述评——以区域为例[J].广西社会科学,2006,6:43-47.
[140]王卫东.区域工业化发展阶段的实证分析——以宁波市为例[J].特区经济,2007,3:55-57.
[141]王延中.环渤海地区工业化水平研究[J].天津社会科学,2007,5:70-77.
[142]威廉·哈勒根,张军.转轨国家的初始条件、改革速度与经济增长[J].经济研究,1999,10:69-74.
[143]卫龙宝,阮建青.产业集群与企业家才能——基于濮院羊毛衫产业的案例研究[J].浙江社会科学,2009,7:25-31.
[144]魏后凯,陈耀.中国西部工业化与软环境建设[M].北京:中国财政经济出版社,2003.
[145]文玫.中国工业在区域上的重新定位和聚集[J].经济研究,2004,2:84-94.
[146]吴义爽.制度安排、企业家才能配置与中国持续经济增长[J].理论探讨,2010,1:74-77.
[147]伍云长.工业化发展模式比较[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版),1990,1:72-79.
[148]西奥多·W·舒尔茨.改造传统农业[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[149]西蒙·库兹涅茨.各国的经济增长[M].北京:商务印书馆,1999.
[150]项国鹏,李武杰,肖建忠.转型经济中的企业家制度能力:中国企业家的实证研究及其启示[J].管理世界,2009,11:103-114.
[151]徐兰伏.工业区位三角形图的判读方法与训练[J].地理教育,2006,1:49.
[152]亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究[M].北京:商务印书馆.1979.
[153]亚历山大·格申克龙.经济落后的历史透视[M].北京:商务印书馆,2009.
[154]颜双波.我国工业化进程的区域比较与分析[J].中共福建省委党校学报,2010,8:61-65.
[155]杨海军,肖灵机,邹泽清.工业化阶段的判断标准:霍夫曼系数法的缺陷及其修正——以江西、江苏为例的分析[J].财经论丛,2008,2:7-14.
[156]杨宇,郑垂勇.企业家精神和区域经济增长的典型相关分析[J].工业技术经济,2007,26(03):114-116.
[157]姚洋.高水平陷阱——李约瑟之谜再考察[J].经济研究,2003,1:71-79.
[158]叶勤.企业家精神的兴起对美国经济增长的促进作用及其启示[J].外国经济与管理,2000,10:16-20.
[159]雍红月,李松林.谈工业化概念及工业化阶段的划分标准[J].内蒙古统计,2002,2:36-38.
[160]于谦.内生增长理论对我国农业现代化的启示[J].科技管理研究,2010,7:216-223.
[161]袁天凤,刘晓鹰,杨军.中国西部工业化进程与继续工业化途径——基于四川的实证分析[J].经济体制改革,2010,4:141-145.
[162]袁正.分工的一般理论与古典增长框架[J].经济学家,2005,6:103-108.
[163]约翰·冯·杜能.孤立国同农业和国民经济的关系[M].北京:商务印书馆,1997.
[164]约翰·科迪.发展中国家的工业发展政策[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1990.
[165]约翰·伊特韦尔,默里·米尔盖特,彼得·纽曼.新帕尔格雷夫大词典[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1996.
[166]约瑟夫·熊彼特.经济发展理论——对于利润、资本、信贷、利息和经济周期的考察[M].北京:商务印书馆,1990.
[167]张建军,张志学.中国民营企业家的政治战略[J].管理世界,2005,7:94-105.
[168]张建君.发展模式和经济平等——苏南和温州的比较[J].管理世界,2006,8:36-46.
[169]张林,刘继生.信息时代区位论发展的新趋势[J].经济地理,2006,26(02):181-185.
[170]张培刚.发展经济学教程(修订版)[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2007.
[171]张培刚.农业与工业化(上卷)[M].武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2002.
[172]张同升,梁进社,宋金平.中国制造业省区间分布的集中与分散研究[J].经济地理,2005,25(03):315-319.
[173]张伟,周鲁柱.区域新型工业化的理论基础、水平测度与促进措施[J].求索,2006,6:6-9.
[174]张文忠,张军涛.经济学和地理学对区位论发展轨迹的影响[J].地理科学进展,1999,18(01):54-59.
[175]张燕.西方区域经济理论综述[J].当代财经,2003,12:86-88.
[176]张燕韡.农村工业化模式演变与城镇化路径选择[J].经济问题探索,2007,7:38-42.
[177]张迎春,李萍.企业家创新能力对区域经济增长的贡献分析——以辽宁省为例[J].财经问题研究,2006,9:92-96.
[178]赵奉军,高波.创业精神与经济发展的U型关系及其检验[J].经济管理,2009,4:35-40.
[179]赵伟,黄先海.外部约束:中国两种工业化区域模式扩散的主要障碍[J].中国工业经济,1997,11:49-53.
[180]赵伟.工业化与城市化:沿海三大区域模式及其演化机理分析[J].社会科学战线,2009,11:74-81.
[181]中国企业家调查系统.市场化改革与中国企业家成长——2008·中国企业家队伍成长与发展15年调查综合报告(下)[J].管理世界,2008,12:103-113.
[182]中国企业家调查系统.中国企业家队伍成长现状与环境评价——2003年中国企业经营者成长与发展专题调查报告[J].管理世界,2003,7:110-119.
[183]钟宁桦.农村工业化还能走多远?[J].经济研究,2011,1:18-27.
[184]周金泉,刘兆峰,邓增永.企业家理论问题探究[J].山西财经大学学报,2004,26(06):21-25.
[185]周叔莲,郭克莎.中国工业增长与结构变动研究[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2000.
[186]周文,李晓红.中国经济转型中的企业成长——基于分工与信任的视角[J].管理世界,2009,12:180-181.
[187]朱应皋,王遐见.中国经济发达地区工业化水平探析——江苏工业化发展水平的个案研究[J].当代经济研究,2002,3:21-25.
[188]庄子银.南方模仿、企业家精神和长期增长[J].经济研究,2003,1:62-70.
[189]庄子银.企业家精神、持续技术创新和长期经济增长的微观机制[J].世界经济,2005,12:32-43.