基于开发区生命周期理论的国家级经开区与高新区发展研究
|
摘要
基于国家级开发区生命周期理论对经开区和高新区的产业发展、空间溢出效应、经济增长效率及方式、区域创新系统等各个方面的研究能够揭示国家级开发区的发展规律并找到最优发展模式，优化落后地区的发展路径。因此，本文通过对国家级开发区二十几年发展历程的回顾以及重新审视，以期从更为宏观的角度研究经开区和高新区的发展特点，二者发展的共性与差异，最后针对两类国家级开发区的阶段特色提出差异化的产业政策。
（1）开发区生命周期理论
基于以上认知，本文首先将国家级开发区的生命周期理论同产业生命周期理论、企业生命周期理论和技术生命周期理论结合起来，建立更为宏观的生命周期理论框架，并针对几类生命周期理论间的包络关系进行探讨。高新区的发展主要依靠技术生命周期，而经开区的发展则主要依靠产业生命周期。另外，国家级开发区的生命周期特征明显，因此可以根据特殊的产业政策、发展目标，更合理地对国家级开发区进行阶段定位。
（2）专业化生产与产业结构趋同
为明确国家级开发区成长期的发展差异，本文采用了一定统计方法对国家级开发区的主导产业发展现状和产业趋同情况进行了研究。经过地区专业化指数的测度发现，传统主导产业分布相对均匀，地区专业化程度差异不大，但战略性新兴产业的地区专业化程度差异非常大：化工行业和家电制造产业虽然生产集中，但集中地区的专业化生产程度并不高，生物医药产业虽然在全国都有分布，但主要专业化生产集中在某些发达地区，数字技术、海洋产业、物联网和创意文化产业的地理集中和专业化程度相吻合。选择战略性新兴产业作为主导产业的国家级开发区存在着很明显的产业结构趋同，这种趋同不仅出现在同类开发区之间，而且蔓延到经开区和高新区。所以优化产业结构，培养比较优势是两类国家级开发区实现互补协同发展的最优方法。
（3）生产效率及增长途径差异
首先，经开区及高新区的随机前沿生产函数方程均没有通过时变的技术有效性检验，中性技术进步特征并不显著，随着时间的推移，两类开发区的技术效率均无明显的提升。其次，通过随机前沿生产函数估计和全要素生产率的分解我们发现，经开区和高新区的发展驱动力显著不同。在发展初期，优惠政策是二者发展的主要动力，但在成熟期，经开区主要依靠规模经济效应，而高新区主要通过资源配置来达到优化发展。因此，经开区应主要采用立足本土产业引进外来技术的产业政策，而高新区则更多运用依靠资源培育优势产业的发展模式。另外，劳动力市场扭曲限制了国家级开发区的发展，特别限制了经开区的发展。
（4）国家级开发区的空间溢出效应
经过空间自相关指数Moran’s I测算发现，新经济地理学的假定依然成立：在存在运输成本和不完全竞争条件下，地域溢出效应随着距离的增加而减弱。同时局部Moran’s I指数揭示，经开区的辐射域更广，且大部分地区位于高增长高滞后象限，从经济发展和产业链的角度所观测到的对周围地区的辐射能力更显著。经过空间计量回归模型估计后发现，在地区带动发展潜力方面，高新区以本地区经济增长带动毗邻区域经济增长的直接溢出效应的边际影响为6%，溢出机制主要源于固定资产投入、研发投入和人力资本流动，技术扩散的效果更为显著。经开区方面，以非经济增长的随机扰动因素带动毗邻地区经济发展的间接溢出效应的冲击强度为5%，溢出途径主要依靠地区专业化生产，经开区技术扩散的能力被高估，但产业溢出渠道的影响力被低估。
（5）区域创新系统是国家级开发区创新能力培育的重要依托
在初创期的国家级开发区，适宜采用政府主导的创新系统模式，采用技术政策促进国家级开发区的创新能力，“马歇尔”外部性效果较为显著；在成长期的国家级开发区，学习型的区域创新系统更利于其发展，科学政策效果较好；成熟期的国家级开发区，创新政策的促进效果增强，产业多样化带来的“雅各布”外部性能够显著促进技术扩散和溢出。
（6）产业政策的失效
国家级开发区的产业政策还因特殊的制度背景、主体资格不够明晰、寻租行为和委托—代理问题等因素的影响，执行力大打折扣。首先，目前相对固定的考核制度和分权博弈体系非常不利于现有的产业政策对国家级开发区做出正确的路径指导，地方政府会为了短期利益和更大的分权尺度向以数量为纲的考核标准靠拢，同时寻租式的招商引资模式和政策实行时存在的委托—代理问题进一步导致了国家级开发区的资源浪费。其次，指标体系没有起到正确的规划作用。全国所有的开发区一类评价标准更不利于落后的开发区推进跨越式发展战略。应当对产业指标体系按照国家级开发区的发展阶段进行分层。在没有采取合理的产业政策下，税收流失和地方福利的扭曲是国家级开发区的损失表现。故强化政策执行与保障相关立法是国家级开发区发展的另一项重要措施。
总而言之，现阶段实施的产业政策对于高新区和经开区而言差别不大，经开区与高新区趋同的产业政策必然导致趋同的产业结构。因此，为实现高新区和经开区的有效、合理、长远发展，应实施差异化管理，分而治之，做到产业政策有针对性，战略定位有阶段特色。
The research is based on life cycle theory of state-level development zones regardingthe development of Economic Development Zones and High-tech Development Zones,including the spatial spillover effects, the economic growth efficiency and modes, theregional innovation system and etc. It can reveal the development of the state-leveldevelopment zones, find out the optimal development model and optimize thedevelopment path of backward areas. Therefore, this dissertation, after reviewing andre-examining the development of state-level development zones in last twenty more years,is to study from a macro perspective the features of Economical Development Zones andHigh-tech Development Zones and differences and similarities between the two, in hopethat different yet appropriate industrial policies will be implemented on differentdevelopment zones at all stages.
(A) Life Cycle Theory of Development Zone
Based on the above cognition, firstly this dissertation is to combine the life-cycletheory of the state-level development zones with that of the industry, the corporate and thetechnology in order to discuss the relationship between them and establish a macro lifecycle theoretical framework. The growth stage of the state-level development zones’ lifecycle corresponds to the growth, maturity and recession periods of the industry life cycletheory, but only to the leading period-growth stage of the technology life cycle theory.As for the industry life cycle theory, if appropriate industrial policy is implemented orindustry itself succeeds in transformation, industry life cycle is similar to the state-leveldevelopment zones’ life cycle. The development of High-tech Development Zones mainlyrelies on the technology life cycle, while the development of Economic DevelopmentZones depends largely on the industry life cycle. In addition, due to the distinct features ofstate-level development zones’ life cycle, state-level development zones can be betterpositioned according to the special industrial policy and development goals at differentstages.
(B) Specialized Production and Industrial Structure Convergence
In order to discriminate the differences between the long-term developments ofstate-level development zones, certain statistic methods are applied to study on the development state and industrial convergence of state-level development zones.Traditional leading industry, based on regional specialization index, is relatively evenlydistributed and keeps little differences in the degree of regional specialization, butemerging industries of strategic importance get very large differences in the degree ofregional specialization: Although chemical industry and appliance manufacturing industryis concentrated, specialization is not deep; the biomedical industry are distributed in thecountry, but mainly specialized production concentrated in some developed areas; digitaltechnology, the marine industry, the IT and the creative industries, geographicalconcentration and specialization are matched. The state-level development zones whichselect emerging industries of strategic importance as the leading industry has obviousindustrial convergence, furthermore, this convergence is not only appear in the samedevelopment zone but also spread through High-tech zone.Therefore,optimizing theindustrial structure and developing a comparative advantage are two types of method ofcomplementary and synergistic development
(C) The production efficiency and difference of growth
First, economic and high-tech zones didn’t ostensibly achieve technical improvement,at the same time neutral technical progress features are not significant. Second, throughthe decomposition of SFA function and TFP, there are two significantly different drivingforce of making the economic and high-tech zones progress.Preferential policies is themain driving force of development in the early stages of development, in the mature stageeconomic zones mainly relying on economies of scale,high-tech zones however theallocation of resources to develop. Therefore, the FDI should be used to EconomicDevelopment Zones but High-tech zones mainly rely on the development of resources. Inaddition, the distortions in the labor market have limited the development of state-leveldevelopment zones, specifically limited economic developing zones.
(D) Spatial spillover effects of the state-level developing zones
The Moran's I index shows that the assumption of the new economic geography isstill valid: the the geographical spillover effect diminishes with increasing distance underthe assumption of the presence of transport costs and imperfect competition. LocalMoran's I index reveals economic zones have broader radiation and most of the region islocated in the high growth lag quadrant. Spatial econometric regression model (SEM andSLM) found High-tech Zones direct spillover effects of the economic growth is6%, the main source of the overflow mechanism investment in fixed assets, R&D and humancapital flows, technology diffusion effect is more significant, indirect spillover effects tothe region's economic developing marginal impact is5%, spillover rely mainly on theareas of specialization. Ability of technology diffusion is overestimated, but influence ofindustrial overflow channels is underestimated.
(E) RIS is an important basis for state-level developing zones
In the original period the adminstration-led RIS is more fitted and Marshall’sexternality effect is more significant; in the growing period the studying and sciencepolicy is more fitted; in the mature period, innovative policies and marketing RIS cansignificantly promote the diffusion of technology and overflow, Jacob’s externality ismore efficient.
(F) Industrial policy
Effctiveness of industrial policy is weakened due to the special system of background,ambiguous identity, the impact of rent-seeking behavior and the principal-agent problems.First, the relatively the fixed appraisal system and decentralization game system is notconducive to the existing industrial policy to make the right path, the local governmentwill run for short-term benefits and greater decentralization, meanwhile the principal-agent problems in the rent-seeking FDI mode and policy further lead to a waste ofresources for national developing zones. Secondly, the index system did not play a properrole in planning. Index system should be stratified according to the stage of the state-leveldeveloping zones. The loss of tax revenue and local welfare distortions is the loss of thestate-level developing zones in the absence of the rational industrial policy. Therefore,another important measure of the state-level developing zones is to strengthen theprotection of the implementation of policies and related legislation.
Finally, now industrial policy for the high-tech zones and economic zones is not verydifferent, which inevitably leads to the convergence of the industrial structure based on theconvergence of industrial policy. Therefore, the policy and strategy of the high-tech zonesand economic zones should be divided according to the different stages.
（1）开发区生命周期理论
基于以上认知，本文首先将国家级开发区的生命周期理论同产业生命周期理论、企业生命周期理论和技术生命周期理论结合起来，建立更为宏观的生命周期理论框架，并针对几类生命周期理论间的包络关系进行探讨。高新区的发展主要依靠技术生命周期，而经开区的发展则主要依靠产业生命周期。另外，国家级开发区的生命周期特征明显，因此可以根据特殊的产业政策、发展目标，更合理地对国家级开发区进行阶段定位。
（2）专业化生产与产业结构趋同
为明确国家级开发区成长期的发展差异，本文采用了一定统计方法对国家级开发区的主导产业发展现状和产业趋同情况进行了研究。经过地区专业化指数的测度发现，传统主导产业分布相对均匀，地区专业化程度差异不大，但战略性新兴产业的地区专业化程度差异非常大：化工行业和家电制造产业虽然生产集中，但集中地区的专业化生产程度并不高，生物医药产业虽然在全国都有分布，但主要专业化生产集中在某些发达地区，数字技术、海洋产业、物联网和创意文化产业的地理集中和专业化程度相吻合。选择战略性新兴产业作为主导产业的国家级开发区存在着很明显的产业结构趋同，这种趋同不仅出现在同类开发区之间，而且蔓延到经开区和高新区。所以优化产业结构，培养比较优势是两类国家级开发区实现互补协同发展的最优方法。
（3）生产效率及增长途径差异
首先，经开区及高新区的随机前沿生产函数方程均没有通过时变的技术有效性检验，中性技术进步特征并不显著，随着时间的推移，两类开发区的技术效率均无明显的提升。其次，通过随机前沿生产函数估计和全要素生产率的分解我们发现，经开区和高新区的发展驱动力显著不同。在发展初期，优惠政策是二者发展的主要动力，但在成熟期，经开区主要依靠规模经济效应，而高新区主要通过资源配置来达到优化发展。因此，经开区应主要采用立足本土产业引进外来技术的产业政策，而高新区则更多运用依靠资源培育优势产业的发展模式。另外，劳动力市场扭曲限制了国家级开发区的发展，特别限制了经开区的发展。
（4）国家级开发区的空间溢出效应
经过空间自相关指数Moran’s I测算发现，新经济地理学的假定依然成立：在存在运输成本和不完全竞争条件下，地域溢出效应随着距离的增加而减弱。同时局部Moran’s I指数揭示，经开区的辐射域更广，且大部分地区位于高增长高滞后象限，从经济发展和产业链的角度所观测到的对周围地区的辐射能力更显著。经过空间计量回归模型估计后发现，在地区带动发展潜力方面，高新区以本地区经济增长带动毗邻区域经济增长的直接溢出效应的边际影响为6%，溢出机制主要源于固定资产投入、研发投入和人力资本流动，技术扩散的效果更为显著。经开区方面，以非经济增长的随机扰动因素带动毗邻地区经济发展的间接溢出效应的冲击强度为5%，溢出途径主要依靠地区专业化生产，经开区技术扩散的能力被高估，但产业溢出渠道的影响力被低估。
（5）区域创新系统是国家级开发区创新能力培育的重要依托
在初创期的国家级开发区，适宜采用政府主导的创新系统模式，采用技术政策促进国家级开发区的创新能力，“马歇尔”外部性效果较为显著；在成长期的国家级开发区，学习型的区域创新系统更利于其发展，科学政策效果较好；成熟期的国家级开发区，创新政策的促进效果增强，产业多样化带来的“雅各布”外部性能够显著促进技术扩散和溢出。
（6）产业政策的失效
国家级开发区的产业政策还因特殊的制度背景、主体资格不够明晰、寻租行为和委托—代理问题等因素的影响，执行力大打折扣。首先，目前相对固定的考核制度和分权博弈体系非常不利于现有的产业政策对国家级开发区做出正确的路径指导，地方政府会为了短期利益和更大的分权尺度向以数量为纲的考核标准靠拢，同时寻租式的招商引资模式和政策实行时存在的委托—代理问题进一步导致了国家级开发区的资源浪费。其次，指标体系没有起到正确的规划作用。全国所有的开发区一类评价标准更不利于落后的开发区推进跨越式发展战略。应当对产业指标体系按照国家级开发区的发展阶段进行分层。在没有采取合理的产业政策下，税收流失和地方福利的扭曲是国家级开发区的损失表现。故强化政策执行与保障相关立法是国家级开发区发展的另一项重要措施。
总而言之，现阶段实施的产业政策对于高新区和经开区而言差别不大，经开区与高新区趋同的产业政策必然导致趋同的产业结构。因此，为实现高新区和经开区的有效、合理、长远发展，应实施差异化管理，分而治之，做到产业政策有针对性，战略定位有阶段特色。
The research is based on life cycle theory of state-level development zones regardingthe development of Economic Development Zones and High-tech Development Zones,including the spatial spillover effects, the economic growth efficiency and modes, theregional innovation system and etc. It can reveal the development of the state-leveldevelopment zones, find out the optimal development model and optimize thedevelopment path of backward areas. Therefore, this dissertation, after reviewing andre-examining the development of state-level development zones in last twenty more years,is to study from a macro perspective the features of Economical Development Zones andHigh-tech Development Zones and differences and similarities between the two, in hopethat different yet appropriate industrial policies will be implemented on differentdevelopment zones at all stages.
(A) Life Cycle Theory of Development Zone
Based on the above cognition, firstly this dissertation is to combine the life-cycletheory of the state-level development zones with that of the industry, the corporate and thetechnology in order to discuss the relationship between them and establish a macro lifecycle theoretical framework. The growth stage of the state-level development zones’ lifecycle corresponds to the growth, maturity and recession periods of the industry life cycletheory, but only to the leading period-growth stage of the technology life cycle theory.As for the industry life cycle theory, if appropriate industrial policy is implemented orindustry itself succeeds in transformation, industry life cycle is similar to the state-leveldevelopment zones’ life cycle. The development of High-tech Development Zones mainlyrelies on the technology life cycle, while the development of Economic DevelopmentZones depends largely on the industry life cycle. In addition, due to the distinct features ofstate-level development zones’ life cycle, state-level development zones can be betterpositioned according to the special industrial policy and development goals at differentstages.
(B) Specialized Production and Industrial Structure Convergence
In order to discriminate the differences between the long-term developments ofstate-level development zones, certain statistic methods are applied to study on the development state and industrial convergence of state-level development zones.Traditional leading industry, based on regional specialization index, is relatively evenlydistributed and keeps little differences in the degree of regional specialization, butemerging industries of strategic importance get very large differences in the degree ofregional specialization: Although chemical industry and appliance manufacturing industryis concentrated, specialization is not deep; the biomedical industry are distributed in thecountry, but mainly specialized production concentrated in some developed areas; digitaltechnology, the marine industry, the IT and the creative industries, geographicalconcentration and specialization are matched. The state-level development zones whichselect emerging industries of strategic importance as the leading industry has obviousindustrial convergence, furthermore, this convergence is not only appear in the samedevelopment zone but also spread through High-tech zone.Therefore,optimizing theindustrial structure and developing a comparative advantage are two types of method ofcomplementary and synergistic development
(C) The production efficiency and difference of growth
First, economic and high-tech zones didn’t ostensibly achieve technical improvement,at the same time neutral technical progress features are not significant. Second, throughthe decomposition of SFA function and TFP, there are two significantly different drivingforce of making the economic and high-tech zones progress.Preferential policies is themain driving force of development in the early stages of development, in the mature stageeconomic zones mainly relying on economies of scale,high-tech zones however theallocation of resources to develop. Therefore, the FDI should be used to EconomicDevelopment Zones but High-tech zones mainly rely on the development of resources. Inaddition, the distortions in the labor market have limited the development of state-leveldevelopment zones, specifically limited economic developing zones.
(D) Spatial spillover effects of the state-level developing zones
The Moran's I index shows that the assumption of the new economic geography isstill valid: the the geographical spillover effect diminishes with increasing distance underthe assumption of the presence of transport costs and imperfect competition. LocalMoran's I index reveals economic zones have broader radiation and most of the region islocated in the high growth lag quadrant. Spatial econometric regression model (SEM andSLM) found High-tech Zones direct spillover effects of the economic growth is6%, the main source of the overflow mechanism investment in fixed assets, R&D and humancapital flows, technology diffusion effect is more significant, indirect spillover effects tothe region's economic developing marginal impact is5%, spillover rely mainly on theareas of specialization. Ability of technology diffusion is overestimated, but influence ofindustrial overflow channels is underestimated.
(E) RIS is an important basis for state-level developing zones
In the original period the adminstration-led RIS is more fitted and Marshall’sexternality effect is more significant; in the growing period the studying and sciencepolicy is more fitted; in the mature period, innovative policies and marketing RIS cansignificantly promote the diffusion of technology and overflow, Jacob’s externality ismore efficient.
(F) Industrial policy
Effctiveness of industrial policy is weakened due to the special system of background,ambiguous identity, the impact of rent-seeking behavior and the principal-agent problems.First, the relatively the fixed appraisal system and decentralization game system is notconducive to the existing industrial policy to make the right path, the local governmentwill run for short-term benefits and greater decentralization, meanwhile the principal-agent problems in the rent-seeking FDI mode and policy further lead to a waste ofresources for national developing zones. Secondly, the index system did not play a properrole in planning. Index system should be stratified according to the stage of the state-leveldeveloping zones. The loss of tax revenue and local welfare distortions is the loss of thestate-level developing zones in the absence of the rational industrial policy. Therefore,another important measure of the state-level developing zones is to strengthen theprotection of the implementation of policies and related legislation.
Finally, now industrial policy for the high-tech zones and economic zones is not verydifferent, which inevitably leads to the convergence of the industrial structure based on theconvergence of industrial policy. Therefore, the policy and strategy of the high-tech zonesand economic zones should be divided according to the different stages.
引文
[1] Ahokangas P. and Rasanen P.Small Technology-Based Firms in a Fast GrowingRegional Cluster.New England Journal of Entrepreneurship,1999(2)23.
[2] Ammara Mahmood.Total Factor Productivity Growth in East Asia:A TwoProlonged Approach. European Journal of Economics,2008(12)10-15.
[3] An H. and Cui-xia LI.Synthetic Evaluation on the Development of AgriculturalCircular Economy Based on the Principal Component Analysis:a Case of TailaiCounty in Heilongjiang Province.International Conference on ManagementScience&Engineering(16th).2009.
[4] Anderson T.L.and Hill R.J.The Evolution of Property Rights: A Study of the WestAmerican.Journal of Law and Economics.1975(5):146-208.
[5] Andersson M. and Ejermo O.Knowledge Production in Swedish Functional Regions1993–1999.paper presented at the Ljungby workshop on Knowledge Spillovers.
[6] Andersson.Regional Innovation Systems:Institutional and OrganizationalDimension.Research Policy,1997(2):13-15.
[7] Anselin L.Local Indicators of Spatial Association-LISA.GeographicalAnalysis,1995,27(2):93—115.
[8] Asheim T.Interactive, Innovation Systems and SME Policy.the EGU Commissionon the Organization of Industrial Space ResidentialConference,Gothenburg,Sweden,1998
[9] Athreye S.S. Agglomeration and Growth:A Study of the Cambrige Hi-Tech Cluster.Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper.StanfordUniversity,2002(1)3-42.
[10] Bode E.The Spatial Pattern of Localized R&D Spillovers: an EmpiricalInvestigation for Germany.Journal of Economic Geography,2004(4):43-64.
[11] Borenztein E. De Gregorio J.and Lee J.W.How Does Foreign Investment AffectEconomic Growth?Journal of International Economics,1998(45):115-135.
[12] Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F.Localised Knowledge Spillovers Versus InnovativeMilieux:Knowledge ‘Tacitness’ Reconsidered.Papers in Regional Science,2001A(80):255–73.
[13] Breschi S. and Lissoni, F. Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems:aCritical Survey.Industrial and Corporate Change,2001B(10)no.4:975–1005.
[14] Breschi, S. and Malerba, F. The Geography of Innovation and EconomicClustering：Some Introductory Notes.Industrial and Corporate Change,2001B(10)no.4:817–33.
[15] Brun J. F.and J. L. Combes and M. F. Renard.Are There Spillover Effects betweenthe Coastal and Noncoastal Regions in China?China EconomicReview,2002(13):161—169.
[16] Cappello R.Spatial Transfer of Knowledge in High Technology Milieux:LearningVersus Collective Learning Processes.Regional Studies,1999(33)no.4:353–65.
[17] Cappello R. and Morrison A. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Science Parksin Local Knowledge Creation:A Territorial Perspective,2005,5th Triple HelixConference.
[18] Chris F.the “National System of Innovation” in Historical Perspective.CambridgeJournal of Economics,1995(19):5-24.
[19] Cohendet P. Lerena P. and Marengo L. Theory of the Firm in an EvolutionaryPerspective:A Critical Assessment, Paper Presented and the2nd Annual Conferenceof the International Society for New Institutional Economics,Paris,1998:18–19September
[20] Cooke P. Uranga M.G. and Etxebarna G.Regional System of Innovation:anEvolutionary Perspective.Enviroment and Planning,1998(30):1563-1584.
[21] Cook P. and Hans B. H.Regional Innovation System:the Role of Governance in theGlobalized World,London:UCLA Press,1996
[22] Cyert R. M. and March J. G. A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, EnglewoodCliffs,Prentice-Hall
[23] Debresson C. and Amesse F. Networks of Innovators:A Review and Introduction tothe Issue, Research Policy,1991(20):363–79
[24] Dennis Weil and Y H.Regional Development in China:TrasitionalInstitutions,Embedded Globalization and Hybrid Economics.Eurasion Geographyand Economics,2007,48(1):16-36.
[25] Dorfman N. Route128:The Development of a Regional High-technologyEconomy,Research Policy,1983(12):299–316
[26] Dosi G. Freeman C. Nelson R. Silverberg G. and Soete, L.Technical Change andEconomic Theory,1988(eds), London, Pinter Publishers
[27] Dosi G. Nelson R.R. and Winter S.G.The Nature and Dynamics of OrganizationalCapabilities,2000, Oxford University Press
[28] EL Glaeser, WR Kerr and GAM Ponzetto.Clusters of Entrepreneurship,Journal ofUrban Economics,2010(67):150-168.
[29] Ethier Wilfred J.The General Role of Factor Intensity in the Theorems ofInternational Trade, Economics Letters,1982Elsevier, vol.10(3-4):337-342
[30] Feldman M. P. The Geography of Innovation,Research Policy,1994(20):499–514
[31] Fischer M. and Varga A.Spatial Knowledge Spillovers and University Research:Evidence from Austria. Annals of Regional Science,2003(37):303-322.
[32] Geroski P. A. Do Spillovers Undermine the Incentive to Innovate?1995:76–97
[33] Giuliani E.The Structure of Cluster Knowledge Networks:RIS,2005,SPRU workingpaper.
[34] Glaeser E. Kallal H. Scheinkman J. and Shleifer A. Growth in Cities, Journal ofPolitical Economy,1992(100):1126–52
[35] Griliches Z. The Search for R&D Spillovers, Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1992(94):S29–S47
[36] Griliches Z.Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development toProductivity Growth, The Bell Journal of Economics,1979(10):92–116
[37] Groenewold N.and G. Lee.Interreginal Spillovers in China:the Importance ofCommon Shocks and the Definition of the Regions,China EconomicReview,2008(19):32-25
[38] Groenewold N. G. Lee and A. Chen.Regional Output Spillovers inChina:Estimates from a VAR Model.Papers in RegionalScience,2007(86):101—122
[39] Greunz L.Geographically and Technologically Mediated Knowledge Spilloversbetween European Regions.Annals of Regional Science,2003(37):657-680.
[40] Hazari B. S.and Pasguale M. Free Trade Zones Tariffs and the Rate.OpenEconomics Review,1996(3):199.
[41] Helsley Robert W. and Strange William C.Matching and Agglomeration Economicsin a System of Cities.Regional Science and Urban Economics,1990:189-212.
[42] Isaksen A.Building Regional Innovation Systems:Is Endogenous IndustrialDevelopment Possible in the Global Economy?Canadian Journal of RegionalScience,2001,vol.24(1):101–20
[43] Jaffe A. B. Economic Analysis of Research Spillovers. Implications for theAdvanced Technology Program.Gaithersburg,MD,1996,National Institute ofStandards and Technology
[44] Jaffe A. Trajtenberg M. and Henderson R.Geographic Localization of KnowledgeSpillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993,vol.108(3):577–98
[45] Javidan M.Core Competence:What does it mean in practice?Long RangePlanning,1998,vol.31(1):60–71
[46] Kaldor N.The Case for Regional Policies.In further essays on economictheory,1978:139-154
[47] Kaldor N.The Role of Increasing Returns,Technical Progress and CumulativeCausation in the Theory of International Trade and Economic Growth.EconomicAppliquee34(4),reprinted in the essential Kaldor(1989):327-350.
[48] Keeble, D. and Wilkinson, F.Collective Learning and Knowledge Development inthe Evolution of Regional Clusters of High Technology SMEs in Europe.RegionalStudies,1999,33(4):295–303
[49] Krugman P.Increasing Returns and Economic Geography.Journal of PoliticalEconomy,1991(99):483一499.
[50] Krugman P. Geography and Trade, Cambridge,1991,Mass.MIT Press
[51] Krugman P.and Venables Anthony J.Integration, Specialization andAdjustment.European Economic Review,Elsevier,1999,40(3-5)959-967.
[52] Krugman. Scale Economics,Product Differentiation and The Pattern ofTrade.American Economic Rwview,1980(70):950一959.
[53] Koopmans T.C.Three Essays on The State of Economic Science,1957,NewYork,McGraw-Hill.
[54] Lawson, C. and Lorenz, E. Collective Learning, Tacit Knowledge and RegionalInnovative Capacity, Regional Studies,1999.33(4):305–17
[55] Leinbach T. R.Industry Strategy in Malaysia：The Role of Export ProcessingZones,GeoJournal,1982,6(5):549-468
[56] LI L J,HU P,ZHANG L.Roles,Models and Development Trend of Hi-tech IndustryDevelopment Zones in China.International Journal of TechnologyManagement,2004(28):3-6.
[57] Loufsten H,Lindelouf P.R&D Networks and Product Innovation Pattern-academicand Non-academic New Technology-based Firms on Science Parks, Technovation,2005(25):1025-1037.
[58] Loufsten H,Lindelouf P.Science Parks and The Growth of New Technology-BasedFirms-Academic-Industry Links, Innovation and Markets. Research Policy,2002(31):859-876.
[59] Luger M.I. Goldstein H.A..Technology in The Garden:Research Parks and RegionalEconomic Development.The university of north Carolina press,1991.
[60] Maillat D. Territorial Dynamic, Innovative Milieus and Regional Policy,Entrepreneur-Ship and Regional Development,1995(7)157–65
[61] Maleck E J. The R&D Location Decision Of The Firm and Creative Region-aSurvey.Technovation,1987(6):205-222.
[62] Mercedes D. Michael E. P. Scott S.Cluster,Convergence and EconomicPerformance.2011.5.NBER working paper.
[63] Michael E. Porter.Location,Competition and Economic Development:Local Clusterin a Global Economy.Economic Development Quarterly,2000(1)14-15.
[64] Moore Stephen. China’s Chemical Parks Compete for Investment Dollars,Chemical Week.2004(164):3.
[65] Morgan K.The Learning Region:Institution,Innovation and RegionalRenewal.Regional Studies,1997,31(5):491-503
[66] Niebuhr A. Spatial Effects of European Integration: Do Border Regions BenefitAbove Average?Review of Regional Studies,2006.36(3):254—278
[67] Park S.O. and Markusen A. Generalizing New Industrial Districts:a TheoreticalAgenda and an Application from a Non-Western Economy,Environment andPlanning,1995(27):84-104.
[68] Phan P.H. Siegel D.S.and Wright M., Science Parks and Incubators:Observations,Synthesis and Future Research,Journal of Business Venturing,2005(20):165-182.
[69] Porter M.Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.Harvard BusinessReview,1998(11-12):77-90.
[70] Porter M.Location,Competition, and Economic Development:Local Clusters in aGlobal Economy. Economic Development Quarterly,2000(14):15-20.
[71] Sargent John.What Happens When Relatives Cost Increase in ProcessingZones,World Development,2004(323):201.
[72] Sean C,Kirk K.Innovative Cities in China:Lessons From Pudong NewDistrict,Zhangjiang High-tech Park and SMIC Village.InnovationManagement,2008,10(2/3):247-257.
[73] Siegel D. Westhead P. Wright M..Science Parks and the Performance of NewTechnology-Based Firms:a Review of Recent U.K. Evidence and an Agenda forFuture Research,Small Business Economics,2003(20):177-184.
[74] SS Rosenthal, WC Strange, Evidence on the Nature and Sources of AgglomerationEconomies, Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics,2004(4):2119-2171.
[75] Sternberg R. Reasons for the Genesis of High-Tech Regions-TheoreticalExplanation and Empirical Evidence.Geoforum,1996,27(2):205-223.
[76] Storper M. The Resurgence of Regional Economics, Ten Years Later:the Region asa Nexus of Untraded Interdependencies,Europe Urban Studies.1995(23):199.
[77] Stuart M,Yunfeng D.Science Park in China：A Cautionary Exploration.InternationalJournal of Technology Intelligence and Planning,2004,1(1):1-14.
[78] Wei Y D,Leung C.Development Zones,Foreign Investment and Global CityFormation in Shanghai.Growth and Change,2005,36(1):16-40.
[79] Westhead P. Storey D.J.an Assessment of Firms Located on and of Science Parks inthe UK,London:HMSO,1994.
[80] Wiig H. Wood M.What Comprises a Regional Innovation System?.An EmpiricalStudy.1999.http//web.sol./step/195/195.htm.
[81] Yasser A. and Frederick L.Relating the Knowledge Production Function to TotalFactor Productivity: An Endogenous Growth Puzzle[R].2004.
[82] Yeung Y M,Joanna L,Gordon K.China’s Special Economic Zones at30.EurasianGeography and Economics,2009,50(2):222.
[83] Ying L. G..Measuring the Spillover Effects: Some Chinese Evidence，Papers inRegional Science，2000.79(1):75—89.
[84] Zhu L L,You J X,Zhang J T.Empirical Research on Comprehensive IndexEvaluation of State-Level Economic and Technological Development Zones inChina:Proceedings of the3rd International Conference on Risk Management andGlobal e-Bussiness,Incheon,Korea：Inha University Press,2009:1027-1032.
[85] Harris C. D.The Market as a Factor in the Localization of Industry in the UnitedStates.Annals of the Association of American Geographer.1954(44)315—348.
[86] Mion.G.. Spatial Externalities and Empirical Analysis: The Case of Italy.Journal ofUrban Economics,2003(56):97-118.
[87]安虎森主编.区域经济学通论[M].北京:经济科学出版社，2004
[88]敖丽红.县域经济发展与“农三化”互动研究[D].东北师范大学，2009
[89]蔡昉,王德文,都阳.劳动力市场扭曲对区域差距的影响[J].中国社会科学,2001,02：4-14+204.
[90]蔡瑞坷.乡镇企业:县域经济增长方式转变的重点[J].经济论坛，1997，（4）：30-31
[91]曹芳东，吴江等.基于空间计量经济模型的县域经济发展差异研究——以江苏省为例[J].地域研究与开发，2010(12)
[92]曹敏娜,王兴平.高新技术产业开发区的功能定位研究——以南京高新区为例[J].人文地理,2003,02：37-41+74.
[93]陈景辉,于成学.跨国公司嵌入与区域产业集聚战略——以英特尔大连投资为例[J].内蒙古大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2010,v.42；No.17904：22-27.
[94]陈景辉.基于跨国公司嵌入的开发区产业集聚模式研究[J].特区经济,2010,No.25504：294-296.
[95]陈淮.未来几年中国经济的关键词：就业结构调整扩大内需[J].发展,2001,11：12-18.
[96]陈益升,欧阳资力,陆容安.国家高新区考核评价指标体系设计[J].科研管理,1996,06：1-7.
[97]樊福卓.长江三角洲地区工业分工：1998—2008——省级层面与市级层面比较[J].产业经济研究,2011,No.5304：8-16.
[98]范云峰,刘军林.产业园区的生命周期[J].中国国情国力,2009,No.20211：28-30.
[99]傅勇,白龙.中国改革开放以来的全要素生产率变动及其分解（1978～2006年）——基于省际面板数据的Malmquist指数分析[J].金融研究,2009,No.34907：38-51.
[100]盖文启.论区域经济发展与区域创新环境[J].学术研究,2002,01：60-63.
[101]韩民春，蔡宇飞.产业集聚、地区专业化生产与产业结构趋同——以国家级开发区的主导产业为例[J].资源与产业.
[102]韩民春，蔡宇飞.适应战略性新兴产业发展的区域创新系统研究[J].中国科技论坛，2012,3.
[103]贺东航,孔繁斌.公共政策执行的中国经验[J].中国社会科学,2011,No.19105：61-79+220-221.
[104]洪燕.开发区生命周期的研究[D].复旦大学,2006.
[105]洪燕.制度集聚：我国高科技工业园区产业集群形成机制的新解释——以上海张江生物医药产业集群为例[J].生产力研究,2006,04：178-179.
[106]胡鞍钢,熊义志.我国知识发展的地区差距分析：特点、成因及对策[J].管理世界,2000,03：5-17+216.
[107]胡新智.中国国家级经济技术开发区产业集群效果分析[J].管理评论,2005,07：20-26+63.
[108]胡钟平.论提升我国政府公共政策执行力的途径[D].中南大学,2006.
[109]李俊莉,王慧,郑国.开发区建设对中国城市发展影响作用的聚类分析评价[J].人文地理,2006,04：39-43.
[110]李耀尧.创新产业集聚与中国开发区产业升级研究[D].暨南大学,2011.
[111]刘婕.我国公共政策执行偏差的原因及对策分析[D].山东大学,2006.
[112]刘晶,陈宝胜.公共对话式政策执行：建设服务型政府的重要突破口[J].中国行政管理,2013,No.33101：34-38.
[113]刘婷,平瑛.产业生命周期理论研究进展[J].湖南农业科学,2009,No.08：93-96+99.
[114] M.I.Luger,H.A.Goldstein,王辑慈.科学园作为区域政策工具的评价（续）[J].地理译报,1992,01：6-10.
[115]聂鸣,李俊,骆静.OECD国家产业集群政策分析和对我国的启示[J].中国地质大学学报（社会科学版）,2002,01：40-43.
[116]倪强.基于随机前沿和随机森林法的沿海开发区发展效率研究[D].天津大学,2011.
[117]彭文慧.社会资本与我国区域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济学研究[D].华中科技大学,2012.
[118]皮黔生.天津滨海新区行政管理体制的创新[J].开放导报,2007,No.13304：42-43.
[119]齐德义.促进国家级开发区产业集群的对策[J].生产力研究,2006,02：155-156+168.
[120]齐明山,陈虎.当代中国公共政策输入机制的制度分析[J].党政干部论坛,2006,10：23-25.
[121]秦远建,江晶.高新技术开发区内现代生产性服务业集群研究[J].武汉理工大学学报（信息与管理工程版）,2006,10：35-38.
[122]邱伟华,余飞跃.公共政策科学分类与解决社会问题的逻辑框架[J].华东经济管理,2013,v.27；No.19301：146-149.
[123]邵政,宋静雅.长三角地区国家级经济技术开发区的聚类分析与评价[J].经济研究导刊,2010,No.9319：115-117.
[124]沈伟国,陈艺春.我国高新区二次创业“四位一体”评价指标体系研究[J].经济问题探索,2006,12：136-139.
[125]孙福全.对高新技术产业开发区产业结构趋同现象的思考[J].中国科技论坛,1997,04：40-43.
[126]孙丽文,吕静韦,段妍.基于面板模型的高新技术产业关键影响因素分析——以河北省为例[J].河北工业大学学报,2009,v.38；No.14802：37-41.
[127]孙婷婷,林涛.上海市级开发区发展现状评析[J].上海师范大学学报（自然科学版）,2010,v.3906：644-652.
[128]孙霞.产业集群与区域经济非均衡协调发展[D].华中科技大学,2009.
[129]孙遇春,徐吉祥,毛才盛.基于聚类分析的开发区战略集团研究[J].科学管理研究,2011,v.29；No.18405：74-77.
[130]孙遇春,徐吉祥,张建同,孙启承.国家级经济开发区发展水平的比较与评估[J].统计与决策,2010,No.31414：39-41.
[131]唐承丽,周海兰,周国华.基于生命周期理论的开发区差别化调控政策探讨——以湖南省开发区为例[J].湖南师范大学自然科学学报,2012,v.35；No.13302：88-94.
[132]王峰玉,朱晓娟.中国开发区的发展回顾与战略思考[J].云南地理环境研究,2006,04：95-99.
[133]王缉慈.地方产业群战略[J].中国工业经济,2002,03：47-54.
[134]王俊超.基于门限自回归的高新技术产业开发区生命周期评价模型及应用研究[D].合肥工业大学,2010.
[135]王兴平.对新时期区域规划新理念的思考[A].中国城市规划学会.城市规划面对面——2005城市规划年会论文集（上）[C].中国城市规划学会,2005：6.
[136]王兴平,崔功豪.中国城市开发区的空间规模与效益研究[J].城市规划,2003,09：6-12.
[137]王兴平,崔功豪.中国城市开发区的区位效益规律研究[J].城市规划汇刊,2003,03：69-73+96.
[138]卫平，杨宏呈，蔡宇飞.基础研究与企业技术绩效——来自我国大中型工业企业的经验证据[J].中国软科学.2013.2.
[139]魏心镇.关于工业布局理论研究的探索[J].地理科学,1989,01：16-24+95.
[140]翁媛媛,高汝熹,饶文军.地区专业化与产业地理集中的比较研究[J].经济与管理研究,2009,No.19704：39-46.
[141]吴煜,刘荣增.中国高新技术产业开发区发展动态评价[J].城市规划汇刊,2003,01：62-65+96.
[142]吴玉鸣.中国省域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2006,12：101-108.
[143]夏海钧.中国高新技术产业开发区发展研究[D].暨南大学,2001.
[144]谢炜.中国公共政策执行过程中的利益博弈[D].华东师范大学,2007.
[145]邢春生.“新区”：后开发区时代的产物[J].港口经济,2005,05：34-35.
[146]徐吉祥,孙遇春.开发区创新绩效影响因素实证研究[J].科技进步与对策,2011,v.28；No.28719：43-47.
[147]闫国庆,仲鸿生,任建雄,孙琪.我国开发区治理模式探索[J].管理世界,2006,01：147-148.
[148]杨亚沙.国家级经济技术开发区的可持续发展[J].国际经济合作,2006,08：30-33.
[149]余泳泽,张妍.我国高技术产业地区效率差异与全要素生产率增长率分解——基于三投入随机前沿生产函数分析[J].产业经济研究,2012,No.5601：44-53.
[150]章建豪,王兴平.基于GIS的开发区产业空间布局方法研究——以常州市天宁经济开发区为例[A].中国城市规划学会.和谐城市规划——2007中国城市规划年会论文集[C].中国城市规划学会：,2007：9.
[151]张庭伟.高科技工业开发区的选址及发展——美国经验介绍[J].城市规划,1997,01：47-49+60.
[152]张伟,顾朝林,陈田,邱友良.中国高新技术区的综合评价[J].地理研究,1998,03：10-18.
[153]张晓平,刘卫东.开发区与我国城市空间结构演进及其动力机制[J].地理科学,2003,02：142-149.
[154]张艳.我国国家级开发区的实践及转型[D].同济大学,2008.
[155]张勇.转型期开发区特色的城市文化研究[D].中央美术学院,2012.
[156]赵伟,马瑞永,何元庆.全要素生产率变动的分解——基于Malmquist生产力指数的实证分析[J].统计研究,2005,07：37-42.
[157]郑国.基于政策视角的中国开发区生命周期研究[J].经济问题探索,2008,No.31409：9-12.
[158]郑国,王慧.中国城市开发区研究进展与展望[J].城市规划,2005,08：51-58.
[159]郑静,薛德升,朱竑.论城市开发区的发展：历史进程、理论背景及生命周期[J].世界地理研究,2000,02：79-86.
[160]周晓艳,韩朝华.中国各地区生产效率与全要素生产率增长率分解（1990-2006）[J].南开经济研究,2009,No.14905：26-48.
[161]周伟林,桂秋.中国高新区聚类分析与评价[J].浙江社会科学,2002,03：39-44.
[162]周元,王海燕.关于我国区域自主创新的几点思考[J].中国软科学,2006,01：13-17.
[163]朱立龙,尤建新,张建同,孙遇春.国家级经济技术开发区综合评价模型实证研究[J].公共管理学报,2010,v.7；No.2602：115-121+128.
[164]朱立龙,张建同,孙遇春.我国国家级经济技术开发区综合指标评价研究[J].科学管理研究,2008,No.16504：50-54.
[165]朱彦恒,张明玉,曾维良.中国经济技术开发区生命周期规范研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,07：98-101.
[2] Ammara Mahmood.Total Factor Productivity Growth in East Asia:A TwoProlonged Approach. European Journal of Economics,2008(12)10-15.
[3] An H. and Cui-xia LI.Synthetic Evaluation on the Development of AgriculturalCircular Economy Based on the Principal Component Analysis:a Case of TailaiCounty in Heilongjiang Province.International Conference on ManagementScience&Engineering(16th).2009.
[4] Anderson T.L.and Hill R.J.The Evolution of Property Rights: A Study of the WestAmerican.Journal of Law and Economics.1975(5):146-208.
[5] Andersson M. and Ejermo O.Knowledge Production in Swedish Functional Regions1993–1999.paper presented at the Ljungby workshop on Knowledge Spillovers.
[6] Andersson.Regional Innovation Systems:Institutional and OrganizationalDimension.Research Policy,1997(2):13-15.
[7] Anselin L.Local Indicators of Spatial Association-LISA.GeographicalAnalysis,1995,27(2):93—115.
[8] Asheim T.Interactive, Innovation Systems and SME Policy.the EGU Commissionon the Organization of Industrial Space ResidentialConference,Gothenburg,Sweden,1998
[9] Athreye S.S. Agglomeration and Growth:A Study of the Cambrige Hi-Tech Cluster.Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper.StanfordUniversity,2002(1)3-42.
[10] Bode E.The Spatial Pattern of Localized R&D Spillovers: an EmpiricalInvestigation for Germany.Journal of Economic Geography,2004(4):43-64.
[11] Borenztein E. De Gregorio J.and Lee J.W.How Does Foreign Investment AffectEconomic Growth?Journal of International Economics,1998(45):115-135.
[12] Breschi, S. and Lissoni, F.Localised Knowledge Spillovers Versus InnovativeMilieux:Knowledge ‘Tacitness’ Reconsidered.Papers in Regional Science,2001A(80):255–73.
[13] Breschi S. and Lissoni, F. Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems:aCritical Survey.Industrial and Corporate Change,2001B(10)no.4:975–1005.
[14] Breschi, S. and Malerba, F. The Geography of Innovation and EconomicClustering：Some Introductory Notes.Industrial and Corporate Change,2001B(10)no.4:817–33.
[15] Brun J. F.and J. L. Combes and M. F. Renard.Are There Spillover Effects betweenthe Coastal and Noncoastal Regions in China?China EconomicReview,2002(13):161—169.
[16] Cappello R.Spatial Transfer of Knowledge in High Technology Milieux:LearningVersus Collective Learning Processes.Regional Studies,1999(33)no.4:353–65.
[17] Cappello R. and Morrison A. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Science Parksin Local Knowledge Creation:A Territorial Perspective,2005,5th Triple HelixConference.
[18] Chris F.the “National System of Innovation” in Historical Perspective.CambridgeJournal of Economics,1995(19):5-24.
[19] Cohendet P. Lerena P. and Marengo L. Theory of the Firm in an EvolutionaryPerspective:A Critical Assessment, Paper Presented and the2nd Annual Conferenceof the International Society for New Institutional Economics,Paris,1998:18–19September
[20] Cooke P. Uranga M.G. and Etxebarna G.Regional System of Innovation:anEvolutionary Perspective.Enviroment and Planning,1998(30):1563-1584.
[21] Cook P. and Hans B. H.Regional Innovation System:the Role of Governance in theGlobalized World,London:UCLA Press,1996
[22] Cyert R. M. and March J. G. A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, EnglewoodCliffs,Prentice-Hall
[23] Debresson C. and Amesse F. Networks of Innovators:A Review and Introduction tothe Issue, Research Policy,1991(20):363–79
[24] Dennis Weil and Y H.Regional Development in China:TrasitionalInstitutions,Embedded Globalization and Hybrid Economics.Eurasion Geographyand Economics,2007,48(1):16-36.
[25] Dorfman N. Route128:The Development of a Regional High-technologyEconomy,Research Policy,1983(12):299–316
[26] Dosi G. Freeman C. Nelson R. Silverberg G. and Soete, L.Technical Change andEconomic Theory,1988(eds), London, Pinter Publishers
[27] Dosi G. Nelson R.R. and Winter S.G.The Nature and Dynamics of OrganizationalCapabilities,2000, Oxford University Press
[28] EL Glaeser, WR Kerr and GAM Ponzetto.Clusters of Entrepreneurship,Journal ofUrban Economics,2010(67):150-168.
[29] Ethier Wilfred J.The General Role of Factor Intensity in the Theorems ofInternational Trade, Economics Letters,1982Elsevier, vol.10(3-4):337-342
[30] Feldman M. P. The Geography of Innovation,Research Policy,1994(20):499–514
[31] Fischer M. and Varga A.Spatial Knowledge Spillovers and University Research:Evidence from Austria. Annals of Regional Science,2003(37):303-322.
[32] Geroski P. A. Do Spillovers Undermine the Incentive to Innovate?1995:76–97
[33] Giuliani E.The Structure of Cluster Knowledge Networks:RIS,2005,SPRU workingpaper.
[34] Glaeser E. Kallal H. Scheinkman J. and Shleifer A. Growth in Cities, Journal ofPolitical Economy,1992(100):1126–52
[35] Griliches Z. The Search for R&D Spillovers, Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1992(94):S29–S47
[36] Griliches Z.Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development toProductivity Growth, The Bell Journal of Economics,1979(10):92–116
[37] Groenewold N.and G. Lee.Interreginal Spillovers in China:the Importance ofCommon Shocks and the Definition of the Regions,China EconomicReview,2008(19):32-25
[38] Groenewold N. G. Lee and A. Chen.Regional Output Spillovers inChina:Estimates from a VAR Model.Papers in RegionalScience,2007(86):101—122
[39] Greunz L.Geographically and Technologically Mediated Knowledge Spilloversbetween European Regions.Annals of Regional Science,2003(37):657-680.
[40] Hazari B. S.and Pasguale M. Free Trade Zones Tariffs and the Rate.OpenEconomics Review,1996(3):199.
[41] Helsley Robert W. and Strange William C.Matching and Agglomeration Economicsin a System of Cities.Regional Science and Urban Economics,1990:189-212.
[42] Isaksen A.Building Regional Innovation Systems:Is Endogenous IndustrialDevelopment Possible in the Global Economy?Canadian Journal of RegionalScience,2001,vol.24(1):101–20
[43] Jaffe A. B. Economic Analysis of Research Spillovers. Implications for theAdvanced Technology Program.Gaithersburg,MD,1996,National Institute ofStandards and Technology
[44] Jaffe A. Trajtenberg M. and Henderson R.Geographic Localization of KnowledgeSpillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations.The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993,vol.108(3):577–98
[45] Javidan M.Core Competence:What does it mean in practice?Long RangePlanning,1998,vol.31(1):60–71
[46] Kaldor N.The Case for Regional Policies.In further essays on economictheory,1978:139-154
[47] Kaldor N.The Role of Increasing Returns,Technical Progress and CumulativeCausation in the Theory of International Trade and Economic Growth.EconomicAppliquee34(4),reprinted in the essential Kaldor(1989):327-350.
[48] Keeble, D. and Wilkinson, F.Collective Learning and Knowledge Development inthe Evolution of Regional Clusters of High Technology SMEs in Europe.RegionalStudies,1999,33(4):295–303
[49] Krugman P.Increasing Returns and Economic Geography.Journal of PoliticalEconomy,1991(99):483一499.
[50] Krugman P. Geography and Trade, Cambridge,1991,Mass.MIT Press
[51] Krugman P.and Venables Anthony J.Integration, Specialization andAdjustment.European Economic Review,Elsevier,1999,40(3-5)959-967.
[52] Krugman. Scale Economics,Product Differentiation and The Pattern ofTrade.American Economic Rwview,1980(70):950一959.
[53] Koopmans T.C.Three Essays on The State of Economic Science,1957,NewYork,McGraw-Hill.
[54] Lawson, C. and Lorenz, E. Collective Learning, Tacit Knowledge and RegionalInnovative Capacity, Regional Studies,1999.33(4):305–17
[55] Leinbach T. R.Industry Strategy in Malaysia：The Role of Export ProcessingZones,GeoJournal,1982,6(5):549-468
[56] LI L J,HU P,ZHANG L.Roles,Models and Development Trend of Hi-tech IndustryDevelopment Zones in China.International Journal of TechnologyManagement,2004(28):3-6.
[57] Loufsten H,Lindelouf P.R&D Networks and Product Innovation Pattern-academicand Non-academic New Technology-based Firms on Science Parks, Technovation,2005(25):1025-1037.
[58] Loufsten H,Lindelouf P.Science Parks and The Growth of New Technology-BasedFirms-Academic-Industry Links, Innovation and Markets. Research Policy,2002(31):859-876.
[59] Luger M.I. Goldstein H.A..Technology in The Garden:Research Parks and RegionalEconomic Development.The university of north Carolina press,1991.
[60] Maillat D. Territorial Dynamic, Innovative Milieus and Regional Policy,Entrepreneur-Ship and Regional Development,1995(7)157–65
[61] Maleck E J. The R&D Location Decision Of The Firm and Creative Region-aSurvey.Technovation,1987(6):205-222.
[62] Mercedes D. Michael E. P. Scott S.Cluster,Convergence and EconomicPerformance.2011.5.NBER working paper.
[63] Michael E. Porter.Location,Competition and Economic Development:Local Clusterin a Global Economy.Economic Development Quarterly,2000(1)14-15.
[64] Moore Stephen. China’s Chemical Parks Compete for Investment Dollars,Chemical Week.2004(164):3.
[65] Morgan K.The Learning Region:Institution,Innovation and RegionalRenewal.Regional Studies,1997,31(5):491-503
[66] Niebuhr A. Spatial Effects of European Integration: Do Border Regions BenefitAbove Average?Review of Regional Studies,2006.36(3):254—278
[67] Park S.O. and Markusen A. Generalizing New Industrial Districts:a TheoreticalAgenda and an Application from a Non-Western Economy,Environment andPlanning,1995(27):84-104.
[68] Phan P.H. Siegel D.S.and Wright M., Science Parks and Incubators:Observations,Synthesis and Future Research,Journal of Business Venturing,2005(20):165-182.
[69] Porter M.Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.Harvard BusinessReview,1998(11-12):77-90.
[70] Porter M.Location,Competition, and Economic Development:Local Clusters in aGlobal Economy. Economic Development Quarterly,2000(14):15-20.
[71] Sargent John.What Happens When Relatives Cost Increase in ProcessingZones,World Development,2004(323):201.
[72] Sean C,Kirk K.Innovative Cities in China:Lessons From Pudong NewDistrict,Zhangjiang High-tech Park and SMIC Village.InnovationManagement,2008,10(2/3):247-257.
[73] Siegel D. Westhead P. Wright M..Science Parks and the Performance of NewTechnology-Based Firms:a Review of Recent U.K. Evidence and an Agenda forFuture Research,Small Business Economics,2003(20):177-184.
[74] SS Rosenthal, WC Strange, Evidence on the Nature and Sources of AgglomerationEconomies, Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics,2004(4):2119-2171.
[75] Sternberg R. Reasons for the Genesis of High-Tech Regions-TheoreticalExplanation and Empirical Evidence.Geoforum,1996,27(2):205-223.
[76] Storper M. The Resurgence of Regional Economics, Ten Years Later:the Region asa Nexus of Untraded Interdependencies,Europe Urban Studies.1995(23):199.
[77] Stuart M,Yunfeng D.Science Park in China：A Cautionary Exploration.InternationalJournal of Technology Intelligence and Planning,2004,1(1):1-14.
[78] Wei Y D,Leung C.Development Zones,Foreign Investment and Global CityFormation in Shanghai.Growth and Change,2005,36(1):16-40.
[79] Westhead P. Storey D.J.an Assessment of Firms Located on and of Science Parks inthe UK,London:HMSO,1994.
[80] Wiig H. Wood M.What Comprises a Regional Innovation System?.An EmpiricalStudy.1999.http//web.sol./step/195/195.htm.
[81] Yasser A. and Frederick L.Relating the Knowledge Production Function to TotalFactor Productivity: An Endogenous Growth Puzzle[R].2004.
[82] Yeung Y M,Joanna L,Gordon K.China’s Special Economic Zones at30.EurasianGeography and Economics,2009,50(2):222.
[83] Ying L. G..Measuring the Spillover Effects: Some Chinese Evidence，Papers inRegional Science，2000.79(1):75—89.
[84] Zhu L L,You J X,Zhang J T.Empirical Research on Comprehensive IndexEvaluation of State-Level Economic and Technological Development Zones inChina:Proceedings of the3rd International Conference on Risk Management andGlobal e-Bussiness,Incheon,Korea：Inha University Press,2009:1027-1032.
[85] Harris C. D.The Market as a Factor in the Localization of Industry in the UnitedStates.Annals of the Association of American Geographer.1954(44)315—348.
[86] Mion.G.. Spatial Externalities and Empirical Analysis: The Case of Italy.Journal ofUrban Economics,2003(56):97-118.
[87]安虎森主编.区域经济学通论[M].北京:经济科学出版社，2004
[88]敖丽红.县域经济发展与“农三化”互动研究[D].东北师范大学，2009
[89]蔡昉,王德文,都阳.劳动力市场扭曲对区域差距的影响[J].中国社会科学,2001,02：4-14+204.
[90]蔡瑞坷.乡镇企业:县域经济增长方式转变的重点[J].经济论坛，1997，（4）：30-31
[91]曹芳东，吴江等.基于空间计量经济模型的县域经济发展差异研究——以江苏省为例[J].地域研究与开发，2010(12)
[92]曹敏娜,王兴平.高新技术产业开发区的功能定位研究——以南京高新区为例[J].人文地理,2003,02：37-41+74.
[93]陈景辉,于成学.跨国公司嵌入与区域产业集聚战略——以英特尔大连投资为例[J].内蒙古大学学报（哲学社会科学版）,2010,v.42；No.17904：22-27.
[94]陈景辉.基于跨国公司嵌入的开发区产业集聚模式研究[J].特区经济,2010,No.25504：294-296.
[95]陈淮.未来几年中国经济的关键词：就业结构调整扩大内需[J].发展,2001,11：12-18.
[96]陈益升,欧阳资力,陆容安.国家高新区考核评价指标体系设计[J].科研管理,1996,06：1-7.
[97]樊福卓.长江三角洲地区工业分工：1998—2008——省级层面与市级层面比较[J].产业经济研究,2011,No.5304：8-16.
[98]范云峰,刘军林.产业园区的生命周期[J].中国国情国力,2009,No.20211：28-30.
[99]傅勇,白龙.中国改革开放以来的全要素生产率变动及其分解（1978～2006年）——基于省际面板数据的Malmquist指数分析[J].金融研究,2009,No.34907：38-51.
[100]盖文启.论区域经济发展与区域创新环境[J].学术研究,2002,01：60-63.
[101]韩民春，蔡宇飞.产业集聚、地区专业化生产与产业结构趋同——以国家级开发区的主导产业为例[J].资源与产业.
[102]韩民春，蔡宇飞.适应战略性新兴产业发展的区域创新系统研究[J].中国科技论坛，2012,3.
[103]贺东航,孔繁斌.公共政策执行的中国经验[J].中国社会科学,2011,No.19105：61-79+220-221.
[104]洪燕.开发区生命周期的研究[D].复旦大学,2006.
[105]洪燕.制度集聚：我国高科技工业园区产业集群形成机制的新解释——以上海张江生物医药产业集群为例[J].生产力研究,2006,04：178-179.
[106]胡鞍钢,熊义志.我国知识发展的地区差距分析：特点、成因及对策[J].管理世界,2000,03：5-17+216.
[107]胡新智.中国国家级经济技术开发区产业集群效果分析[J].管理评论,2005,07：20-26+63.
[108]胡钟平.论提升我国政府公共政策执行力的途径[D].中南大学,2006.
[109]李俊莉,王慧,郑国.开发区建设对中国城市发展影响作用的聚类分析评价[J].人文地理,2006,04：39-43.
[110]李耀尧.创新产业集聚与中国开发区产业升级研究[D].暨南大学,2011.
[111]刘婕.我国公共政策执行偏差的原因及对策分析[D].山东大学,2006.
[112]刘晶,陈宝胜.公共对话式政策执行：建设服务型政府的重要突破口[J].中国行政管理,2013,No.33101：34-38.
[113]刘婷,平瑛.产业生命周期理论研究进展[J].湖南农业科学,2009,No.08：93-96+99.
[114] M.I.Luger,H.A.Goldstein,王辑慈.科学园作为区域政策工具的评价（续）[J].地理译报,1992,01：6-10.
[115]聂鸣,李俊,骆静.OECD国家产业集群政策分析和对我国的启示[J].中国地质大学学报（社会科学版）,2002,01：40-43.
[116]倪强.基于随机前沿和随机森林法的沿海开发区发展效率研究[D].天津大学,2011.
[117]彭文慧.社会资本与我国区域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济学研究[D].华中科技大学,2012.
[118]皮黔生.天津滨海新区行政管理体制的创新[J].开放导报,2007,No.13304：42-43.
[119]齐德义.促进国家级开发区产业集群的对策[J].生产力研究,2006,02：155-156+168.
[120]齐明山,陈虎.当代中国公共政策输入机制的制度分析[J].党政干部论坛,2006,10：23-25.
[121]秦远建,江晶.高新技术开发区内现代生产性服务业集群研究[J].武汉理工大学学报（信息与管理工程版）,2006,10：35-38.
[122]邱伟华,余飞跃.公共政策科学分类与解决社会问题的逻辑框架[J].华东经济管理,2013,v.27；No.19301：146-149.
[123]邵政,宋静雅.长三角地区国家级经济技术开发区的聚类分析与评价[J].经济研究导刊,2010,No.9319：115-117.
[124]沈伟国,陈艺春.我国高新区二次创业“四位一体”评价指标体系研究[J].经济问题探索,2006,12：136-139.
[125]孙福全.对高新技术产业开发区产业结构趋同现象的思考[J].中国科技论坛,1997,04：40-43.
[126]孙丽文,吕静韦,段妍.基于面板模型的高新技术产业关键影响因素分析——以河北省为例[J].河北工业大学学报,2009,v.38；No.14802：37-41.
[127]孙婷婷,林涛.上海市级开发区发展现状评析[J].上海师范大学学报（自然科学版）,2010,v.3906：644-652.
[128]孙霞.产业集群与区域经济非均衡协调发展[D].华中科技大学,2009.
[129]孙遇春,徐吉祥,毛才盛.基于聚类分析的开发区战略集团研究[J].科学管理研究,2011,v.29；No.18405：74-77.
[130]孙遇春,徐吉祥,张建同,孙启承.国家级经济开发区发展水平的比较与评估[J].统计与决策,2010,No.31414：39-41.
[131]唐承丽,周海兰,周国华.基于生命周期理论的开发区差别化调控政策探讨——以湖南省开发区为例[J].湖南师范大学自然科学学报,2012,v.35；No.13302：88-94.
[132]王峰玉,朱晓娟.中国开发区的发展回顾与战略思考[J].云南地理环境研究,2006,04：95-99.
[133]王缉慈.地方产业群战略[J].中国工业经济,2002,03：47-54.
[134]王俊超.基于门限自回归的高新技术产业开发区生命周期评价模型及应用研究[D].合肥工业大学,2010.
[135]王兴平.对新时期区域规划新理念的思考[A].中国城市规划学会.城市规划面对面——2005城市规划年会论文集（上）[C].中国城市规划学会,2005：6.
[136]王兴平,崔功豪.中国城市开发区的空间规模与效益研究[J].城市规划,2003,09：6-12.
[137]王兴平,崔功豪.中国城市开发区的区位效益规律研究[J].城市规划汇刊,2003,03：69-73+96.
[138]卫平，杨宏呈，蔡宇飞.基础研究与企业技术绩效——来自我国大中型工业企业的经验证据[J].中国软科学.2013.2.
[139]魏心镇.关于工业布局理论研究的探索[J].地理科学,1989,01：16-24+95.
[140]翁媛媛,高汝熹,饶文军.地区专业化与产业地理集中的比较研究[J].经济与管理研究,2009,No.19704：39-46.
[141]吴煜,刘荣增.中国高新技术产业开发区发展动态评价[J].城市规划汇刊,2003,01：62-65+96.
[142]吴玉鸣.中国省域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2006,12：101-108.
[143]夏海钧.中国高新技术产业开发区发展研究[D].暨南大学,2001.
[144]谢炜.中国公共政策执行过程中的利益博弈[D].华东师范大学,2007.
[145]邢春生.“新区”：后开发区时代的产物[J].港口经济,2005,05：34-35.
[146]徐吉祥,孙遇春.开发区创新绩效影响因素实证研究[J].科技进步与对策,2011,v.28；No.28719：43-47.
[147]闫国庆,仲鸿生,任建雄,孙琪.我国开发区治理模式探索[J].管理世界,2006,01：147-148.
[148]杨亚沙.国家级经济技术开发区的可持续发展[J].国际经济合作,2006,08：30-33.
[149]余泳泽,张妍.我国高技术产业地区效率差异与全要素生产率增长率分解——基于三投入随机前沿生产函数分析[J].产业经济研究,2012,No.5601：44-53.
[150]章建豪,王兴平.基于GIS的开发区产业空间布局方法研究——以常州市天宁经济开发区为例[A].中国城市规划学会.和谐城市规划——2007中国城市规划年会论文集[C].中国城市规划学会：,2007：9.
[151]张庭伟.高科技工业开发区的选址及发展——美国经验介绍[J].城市规划,1997,01：47-49+60.
[152]张伟,顾朝林,陈田,邱友良.中国高新技术区的综合评价[J].地理研究,1998,03：10-18.
[153]张晓平,刘卫东.开发区与我国城市空间结构演进及其动力机制[J].地理科学,2003,02：142-149.
[154]张艳.我国国家级开发区的实践及转型[D].同济大学,2008.
[155]张勇.转型期开发区特色的城市文化研究[D].中央美术学院,2012.
[156]赵伟,马瑞永,何元庆.全要素生产率变动的分解——基于Malmquist生产力指数的实证分析[J].统计研究,2005,07：37-42.
[157]郑国.基于政策视角的中国开发区生命周期研究[J].经济问题探索,2008,No.31409：9-12.
[158]郑国,王慧.中国城市开发区研究进展与展望[J].城市规划,2005,08：51-58.
[159]郑静,薛德升,朱竑.论城市开发区的发展：历史进程、理论背景及生命周期[J].世界地理研究,2000,02：79-86.
[160]周晓艳,韩朝华.中国各地区生产效率与全要素生产率增长率分解（1990-2006）[J].南开经济研究,2009,No.14905：26-48.
[161]周伟林,桂秋.中国高新区聚类分析与评价[J].浙江社会科学,2002,03：39-44.
[162]周元,王海燕.关于我国区域自主创新的几点思考[J].中国软科学,2006,01：13-17.
[163]朱立龙,尤建新,张建同,孙遇春.国家级经济技术开发区综合评价模型实证研究[J].公共管理学报,2010,v.7；No.2602：115-121+128.
[164]朱立龙,张建同,孙遇春.我国国家级经济技术开发区综合指标评价研究[J].科学管理研究,2008,No.16504：50-54.
[165]朱彦恒,张明玉,曾维良.中国经济技术开发区生命周期规范研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,07：98-101.