基于知识溢出的邻近性对企业、产业和区域创新影响研究
|
摘要
在知识经济的时代,由于资源主导的增长方式向创新主导的增长方式转变,提升创新能力已经成为我国调整产业结构、转变经济增长方式的中心环节。创新是经济发展的原动力,知识是创新的关键投入资源。知识资源是一种具有竞争性和部分排他性的公共产品,知识溢出是知识的自愿或非自愿流动、转移或扩散,知识溢出的外部性会给其拥有者带来损失,但是知识资源只有通过共同分享才能充分实现其价值,而且有利于创造新的知识和增加整体知识存量。生产、获取、扩散和应用知识的能力是提高创新能力的关键。法国邻近动力学派有关邻近性与创新关系的研究表明,国家、区域、产业和企业在地理、组织和技术上的邻近性及其相互联系有利于经济主体交互学习和获取知识并取得创新的成功。因此,对邻近性、知识溢出与创新的关系进行研究具有理论和现实意义。
首先,文章介绍了邻近动力学派研究轨迹,在概括其研究原则和目的的基础上,对邻近性的内涵进行了界定。对组织合作框架下邻近性的地理、组织和技术邻近三个维度的内涵进行了拓展,具体而言,在地理邻近性上,经济主体之间的临时地理邻近和开放学习的思想态度也是获取外溢知识的重要方式；组织邻近性是指经济主体之间组织安排的密切程度。从交易费用理论分析,组织邻近是一种规制结构,它能降低知识溢出过程中的交易成本,抑制经济主体的机会主义行为,建立强弱适度的组织网络是知识溢出的重要制度保证；技术邻近性是指经济主体在知识基础上的相似程度,它是经济主体交流和获取外溢知识的前提。本文分析了知识的类型、知识溢出的内涵、途径以及在创新中的作用,从地理、组织和技术邻近性三个维度定性分析了邻近性对知识溢出与创新的影响机制。在地理、组织和技术邻近性的关系上,它们可以单独或者以组合的方式对经济主体的创新施以影响,利用数学公式推导了邻近性强度和创新绩效之间的关系。
其次,文章对邻近性、知识溢出与企业集群创新之间的关系进行了微观模型分析。企业和其他相关机构在产业集群中具有“天然的”的地理、组织和技术上的多维邻近性。产业集群是企业获取外溢知识的最佳的空间组织形式。尽管多维邻近性对企业等经济主体的知识溢出和创新有多种好处,但是太少或过度的地理、组织和技术邻近对经济主体也有负效应。本文通过引入知识溢出参数和邻近性强度概念研究了企业在邻近性正负效应的权衡中实现创新绩效最优化的机制。具体而言,获得外溢知识是企业在地理上、组织上、技术上邻近的“向心力”,也就是说为了获得外溢知识,企业需要多方面邻近。在生产上,一方面企业从多维邻近性中能够获得外溢知识,提高要素的使用效率,降低企业的可变成本,另一方面,由于知识不是纯粹的公共产品,企业也需要承担获取知识的成本,多维邻近有利于企业通过分摊成本和共担风险的方式进行过程创新；在需求上,消费者多样化的偏好是企业从事产品创新的“牵引力”。产品创新需要新思想和新知识,但是企业过度邻近容易导致企业在技术上的“锁定”,企业为了提高消费者对自己产品的吸引力,企业有移到产业集群外围的倾向。因此,企业在集群创新中需要权衡邻近性的正负效应,在平衡中实现创新绩效的最大化。
再者,本文以我国高技术产业为具体研究对象,从知识溢出的视角探讨了地理、组织和技术上的邻近对高技术产业创新绩效影响的理论机制及其经济效应。高技术产业是隐性知识密集、资源流动快和交叉程度强的行业,邻近性有利于知识在高技术产业之间溢出和流动。文章利用双对数型的区域创新生产函数,以我国省域的高技术产业的创新投入和产出数据,实证检验了地理、组织和技术邻近性对高技术产业创新能力影响效应,研究结果表明：高技术产业的创新绩效不仅与区域内部研发经费支出和人力资本投入有关,而且还与邻近区域的高技术产业的研发活动存在较强的联系,从而证实了地理邻近性(包括区域层面的地理邻近)在高技术产业之间知识溢出和创新中的重要作用；研发经费支出和人力资本投入在知识溢出中的作用不同,区域本身的研发经费支出产生了本地化知识溢出,但邻近区域的高技术产业的研发经费没有积极的溢出效应,并且邻近区域和非邻近区域的人力资本投资对知识溢出和创新具有显著的正向作用,这也证实了临时地理邻近中人力资本的流动在知识溢出中的重要性,同时也表明建立和完善区域之间高技术产业的组织网络,发挥组织邻近性在知识溢出作用的重要性；在技术非中性的条件下,高技术产业在相同的技术邻域进行专业化生产经营活动的极化效应也会影响创新的绩效,本文引入技术邻近性参数的实证表明：技术邻近性对知识溢出和创新存在显著的正向影响,但邻近地区的人力资本投入对创新的影响有所减小,这也表明技术邻近性和地理邻近性不是知识溢出的替换渠道,技术邻近性和地理邻近性是相互补充和相互交错的关系,它们共同对创新绩效施以影响。
接着,文章分析了邻近性、知识溢出与区域创新体系建设之间的关系。区域创新体系内经济主体的相互作用以及区域与外部环境的相互联系决定了区域网络的价值和区域经济运行的质量。为了揭示出邻近性在区域创新体系建设中的重要作用,文章分析了区域创新体系的内外联系,分析了企业家的创业活动以及知识型新企业(NKBFs)在区域创新体系中的作用,从地理、组织和技术邻近性三个方面分析了邻近性对知识溢出和区域创新体系创新绩效的影响。在上述理论分析的基础上,以中关村科技园区为样本,实证分析了邻近性、知识溢出与区域创新体系建设之间的关系,研究结果表明：邻近性有利于企业家创业,并且高层次人才的创业活动,特别是留学人员创办的知识型新企业在中关村区域创新体系的内外联系和创新中发挥了重要的作用,因此,培育企业家精神、引进高层次的留学归国人员创业是区域创新体系建设的重要环节。
最后,文章对邻近性、知识溢出与创新之间的关系进行了归纳和总结,从邻近性的视角分别提出促进企业创新、高技术产业创新和区域创新体系建设的政策建议。
In the knowledge economy era, enhancing innovative ability has become China's central link for adjusting industrial structure and changing economic growth pattern due to resource-led growth transferring to innovation-led growth pattern. Innovations are the motivity of economic development and knowledge resources are the key innovative input. Knowledge spillovers are the voluntary or involuntary mobility, transfer or diffusion of knowledge, whose externalities will cause losses to its owner. However, Knowledge resources, which are competitive and partly exclusive public products, can be fully realized their value only through the sharing of knowledge resources. And the sharing of knowledge resources is also conducive to the creation of new knowledge and the increase of overall knowledge stock. The ability to produce, acquire, diffuse, and apply knowledge is the key to improve the innovative ability. The research on the relationship between proximity and innovation by French School Proximity Dynamics shows that the geographic, organizational and technological proximity and their mutual contact among nations, regions, industries and firms are conducive to interactive learning, acquire knowledge and achieve innovative success. Therefore, studying the relationship between proximity, knowledge spillover and innovation is of theoretical and practical significance.
Firstly, the paper introduces the scientific trajectory of the French School of proximity, and defines the connotation of proximity based on generalizing the principles and purposes of their research, and further develops the connotation of the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity within the framework of inter-organizational cooperation. Specifically, in geographical proximity, the economic agents'temporary geographical proximity and their open learning mental attitude are important ways of access to knowledge spillovers; Organizational proximity refers to the close degree of organizations among economic agents, and it is a regulatory structure from the transaction cost theory, which can reduce the transaction costs of knowledge spillover process and inhibit opportunistic behavior of economic agents. Therefore, establishing the appropriate organizational network is an important institution for ensuring knowledge spillovers; Technological proximity refers to the similarity of the knowledge base in economic agents, and it is the premise of the economic agents exchange and access to knowledge spillovers. This paper analyzes the types of knowledge, the knowledge spillovers content, the approaches of knowledge spillovers and its role in innovation, and the mechanism of proximity effects on knowledge spillovers and innovation from the geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity. In the relationship among the geographic proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity, they can be alone or in the ways of combination to impose on the impact of economic agent's innovation. The paper derives the relationship between proximity and innovation in mathematical method.
Secondly, the paper makes use of microscopic economic model to analyze the relationship among proximity, knowledge spillover and firms cluster innovation. Firms and other relevant institutions have a "natural" geographical, organizational and technical multi-dimensional proximity in the industrial cluster. Industrial cluster is the best spatial organization that firms gain access to knowledge spillovers. Although the multi-dimensional proximity is benefit of knowledge spillovers and innovation for firms and other agents, but too little or too much geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity are also the negative effects on economic agents. The paper studies the optimization mechanism of the innovative performance in trade-off the positive and negative effects of proximity on firm's innovation through the introduction of knowledge spillovers parameters and the concept of proximity strength. Specifically, Access to knowledge spillovers is the "centripetal force" for firms in the geographical proximity, organizational proximity, technological proximity, that is to say, firms need multi-dimensional proximity in order to obtain knowledge spillovers. In production, on the one hand, the multi-dimensional proximity for firms can achieve knowledge spillovers, enhance the efficiency factor and reduce variable costs; On the other hand, firms also need to bear the cost of access to knowledge because knowledge is not pure public products, multi-dimensional proximity is conducive to process innovation through sharing the cost and the risk. In demand, consumer's diverse preferences are the "traction" that enterprises engaged in product innovation. Product innovation requires new ideas and new knowledge, but it is easily for firms to lead to "locking" in the technology because of too much proximity. Firms have a tendency to move to outlying cluster to improve the consumer appeal of their products. Therefore, firms need to balance the positive and negative effects of proximity on innovation in the cluster so as to achieve the maximum innovation performance.
Thirdly, this paper studies the high-tech industries and discuses the theory mechanism and the economic effects of geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity on the innovation performance of high-tech industries. The High-tech industries are tacit knowledge-intensive, the degree of resource flowing fast and strong cross-industry, and proximity is conducive to knowledge spillovers and flows between high-tech industries. This paper examines the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technical proximity effect on high-tech industries innovation by using double logarithmic production function type of regional innovation and innovative input and output data in China's provincial high-tech industries. The results show that:The innovation performance of high-tech industries is relevant to not only R&D expenditure and human capital investment within the regions, but also a strong links with its activities in the neighboring region, thus confirming the important role of the geographical proximity (including the geographical proximity in the regional level) on knowledge spillovers and innovation in high-tech industries. R&D expenditure and human capital investment have different roles on knowledge spillover. The regional R&D expenditures make localized knowledge spillovers, but the R&D funding for high-tech industries in the neighboring regions has no positive spillover effects, and the human capital investment in the neighboring regions and non-adjacent region's has significant positive effect on the knowledge spillover and innovation, which also confirmed the importance of the temporary geographical proximity in flows human capital and knowledge spillovers, but also implied the importance of the establishment and improvement of regional high-tech industries network of organizations and the roles of the organizational proximity in knowledge spillover. Under the technical non-neutral conditions, the polarization effects of the high-tech industries in the same field of technology for specialized production and management activities will also affect innovation performance. Under the introduction of technological proximity parameters, the empirical research on this paper shows that: Technological proximity shows a significant positive impact on knowledge spillover and innovation, but the human capital investments in adjacent areas have reduced the impact on innovation, which also shows that technological proximity and the geographical proximity are not a replacement channel for knowledge spillovers, the technological proximity and the geographical proximity are complementary and mutually staggered relationship, which together exert influence on innovation performance.
Fourthly, this paper analyzes the relationships among the proximity, knowledge spillovers and regional innovation system. The interaction of the economic agents within the regional innovative system and the linkages with the external regions determines the value of regional networks and regional economic operation quality. In order to reveal the important roles of the proximity on the regional innovative system, the paper analyzes the internal and external links of regional innovative system and the role of the business activities of entrepreneurs and knowledge-based new firms (NKBFs) in regional innovation system. It discusses the proximity effects on knowledge spillovers and the innovative performance in regional innovative systems from the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity. According to the above theoretical analysis, the paper empirically analyzes of the relationship among proximity, knowledge spillovers and regional innovation system, which based on a sample of the Zhongguancun Science Park. The results of the study show that:Proximity is conducive to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial activities of high-level talent, especially for the knowledge-based new enterprises founded by the returned students play an important role for the internal and external links in Zhongguancun regional innovation system and innovation. Therefore, fostering the spirit of entrepreneurship, introducing high-level overseas returnee's start-ups are important partes in the construction of the regional innovation system.
Finally, the paper summarizes the relationship among the proximity, knowledge spillover and innovation. And it suggests the innovative policies on firms, high-tech industries, and regional innovation system from the perspective of proximity.
首先,文章介绍了邻近动力学派研究轨迹,在概括其研究原则和目的的基础上,对邻近性的内涵进行了界定。对组织合作框架下邻近性的地理、组织和技术邻近三个维度的内涵进行了拓展,具体而言,在地理邻近性上,经济主体之间的临时地理邻近和开放学习的思想态度也是获取外溢知识的重要方式；组织邻近性是指经济主体之间组织安排的密切程度。从交易费用理论分析,组织邻近是一种规制结构,它能降低知识溢出过程中的交易成本,抑制经济主体的机会主义行为,建立强弱适度的组织网络是知识溢出的重要制度保证；技术邻近性是指经济主体在知识基础上的相似程度,它是经济主体交流和获取外溢知识的前提。本文分析了知识的类型、知识溢出的内涵、途径以及在创新中的作用,从地理、组织和技术邻近性三个维度定性分析了邻近性对知识溢出与创新的影响机制。在地理、组织和技术邻近性的关系上,它们可以单独或者以组合的方式对经济主体的创新施以影响,利用数学公式推导了邻近性强度和创新绩效之间的关系。
其次,文章对邻近性、知识溢出与企业集群创新之间的关系进行了微观模型分析。企业和其他相关机构在产业集群中具有“天然的”的地理、组织和技术上的多维邻近性。产业集群是企业获取外溢知识的最佳的空间组织形式。尽管多维邻近性对企业等经济主体的知识溢出和创新有多种好处,但是太少或过度的地理、组织和技术邻近对经济主体也有负效应。本文通过引入知识溢出参数和邻近性强度概念研究了企业在邻近性正负效应的权衡中实现创新绩效最优化的机制。具体而言,获得外溢知识是企业在地理上、组织上、技术上邻近的“向心力”,也就是说为了获得外溢知识,企业需要多方面邻近。在生产上,一方面企业从多维邻近性中能够获得外溢知识,提高要素的使用效率,降低企业的可变成本,另一方面,由于知识不是纯粹的公共产品,企业也需要承担获取知识的成本,多维邻近有利于企业通过分摊成本和共担风险的方式进行过程创新；在需求上,消费者多样化的偏好是企业从事产品创新的“牵引力”。产品创新需要新思想和新知识,但是企业过度邻近容易导致企业在技术上的“锁定”,企业为了提高消费者对自己产品的吸引力,企业有移到产业集群外围的倾向。因此,企业在集群创新中需要权衡邻近性的正负效应,在平衡中实现创新绩效的最大化。
再者,本文以我国高技术产业为具体研究对象,从知识溢出的视角探讨了地理、组织和技术上的邻近对高技术产业创新绩效影响的理论机制及其经济效应。高技术产业是隐性知识密集、资源流动快和交叉程度强的行业,邻近性有利于知识在高技术产业之间溢出和流动。文章利用双对数型的区域创新生产函数,以我国省域的高技术产业的创新投入和产出数据,实证检验了地理、组织和技术邻近性对高技术产业创新能力影响效应,研究结果表明：高技术产业的创新绩效不仅与区域内部研发经费支出和人力资本投入有关,而且还与邻近区域的高技术产业的研发活动存在较强的联系,从而证实了地理邻近性(包括区域层面的地理邻近)在高技术产业之间知识溢出和创新中的重要作用；研发经费支出和人力资本投入在知识溢出中的作用不同,区域本身的研发经费支出产生了本地化知识溢出,但邻近区域的高技术产业的研发经费没有积极的溢出效应,并且邻近区域和非邻近区域的人力资本投资对知识溢出和创新具有显著的正向作用,这也证实了临时地理邻近中人力资本的流动在知识溢出中的重要性,同时也表明建立和完善区域之间高技术产业的组织网络,发挥组织邻近性在知识溢出作用的重要性；在技术非中性的条件下,高技术产业在相同的技术邻域进行专业化生产经营活动的极化效应也会影响创新的绩效,本文引入技术邻近性参数的实证表明：技术邻近性对知识溢出和创新存在显著的正向影响,但邻近地区的人力资本投入对创新的影响有所减小,这也表明技术邻近性和地理邻近性不是知识溢出的替换渠道,技术邻近性和地理邻近性是相互补充和相互交错的关系,它们共同对创新绩效施以影响。
接着,文章分析了邻近性、知识溢出与区域创新体系建设之间的关系。区域创新体系内经济主体的相互作用以及区域与外部环境的相互联系决定了区域网络的价值和区域经济运行的质量。为了揭示出邻近性在区域创新体系建设中的重要作用,文章分析了区域创新体系的内外联系,分析了企业家的创业活动以及知识型新企业(NKBFs)在区域创新体系中的作用,从地理、组织和技术邻近性三个方面分析了邻近性对知识溢出和区域创新体系创新绩效的影响。在上述理论分析的基础上,以中关村科技园区为样本,实证分析了邻近性、知识溢出与区域创新体系建设之间的关系,研究结果表明：邻近性有利于企业家创业,并且高层次人才的创业活动,特别是留学人员创办的知识型新企业在中关村区域创新体系的内外联系和创新中发挥了重要的作用,因此,培育企业家精神、引进高层次的留学归国人员创业是区域创新体系建设的重要环节。
最后,文章对邻近性、知识溢出与创新之间的关系进行了归纳和总结,从邻近性的视角分别提出促进企业创新、高技术产业创新和区域创新体系建设的政策建议。
In the knowledge economy era, enhancing innovative ability has become China's central link for adjusting industrial structure and changing economic growth pattern due to resource-led growth transferring to innovation-led growth pattern. Innovations are the motivity of economic development and knowledge resources are the key innovative input. Knowledge spillovers are the voluntary or involuntary mobility, transfer or diffusion of knowledge, whose externalities will cause losses to its owner. However, Knowledge resources, which are competitive and partly exclusive public products, can be fully realized their value only through the sharing of knowledge resources. And the sharing of knowledge resources is also conducive to the creation of new knowledge and the increase of overall knowledge stock. The ability to produce, acquire, diffuse, and apply knowledge is the key to improve the innovative ability. The research on the relationship between proximity and innovation by French School Proximity Dynamics shows that the geographic, organizational and technological proximity and their mutual contact among nations, regions, industries and firms are conducive to interactive learning, acquire knowledge and achieve innovative success. Therefore, studying the relationship between proximity, knowledge spillover and innovation is of theoretical and practical significance.
Firstly, the paper introduces the scientific trajectory of the French School of proximity, and defines the connotation of proximity based on generalizing the principles and purposes of their research, and further develops the connotation of the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity within the framework of inter-organizational cooperation. Specifically, in geographical proximity, the economic agents'temporary geographical proximity and their open learning mental attitude are important ways of access to knowledge spillovers; Organizational proximity refers to the close degree of organizations among economic agents, and it is a regulatory structure from the transaction cost theory, which can reduce the transaction costs of knowledge spillover process and inhibit opportunistic behavior of economic agents. Therefore, establishing the appropriate organizational network is an important institution for ensuring knowledge spillovers; Technological proximity refers to the similarity of the knowledge base in economic agents, and it is the premise of the economic agents exchange and access to knowledge spillovers. This paper analyzes the types of knowledge, the knowledge spillovers content, the approaches of knowledge spillovers and its role in innovation, and the mechanism of proximity effects on knowledge spillovers and innovation from the geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity. In the relationship among the geographic proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity, they can be alone or in the ways of combination to impose on the impact of economic agent's innovation. The paper derives the relationship between proximity and innovation in mathematical method.
Secondly, the paper makes use of microscopic economic model to analyze the relationship among proximity, knowledge spillover and firms cluster innovation. Firms and other relevant institutions have a "natural" geographical, organizational and technical multi-dimensional proximity in the industrial cluster. Industrial cluster is the best spatial organization that firms gain access to knowledge spillovers. Although the multi-dimensional proximity is benefit of knowledge spillovers and innovation for firms and other agents, but too little or too much geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity are also the negative effects on economic agents. The paper studies the optimization mechanism of the innovative performance in trade-off the positive and negative effects of proximity on firm's innovation through the introduction of knowledge spillovers parameters and the concept of proximity strength. Specifically, Access to knowledge spillovers is the "centripetal force" for firms in the geographical proximity, organizational proximity, technological proximity, that is to say, firms need multi-dimensional proximity in order to obtain knowledge spillovers. In production, on the one hand, the multi-dimensional proximity for firms can achieve knowledge spillovers, enhance the efficiency factor and reduce variable costs; On the other hand, firms also need to bear the cost of access to knowledge because knowledge is not pure public products, multi-dimensional proximity is conducive to process innovation through sharing the cost and the risk. In demand, consumer's diverse preferences are the "traction" that enterprises engaged in product innovation. Product innovation requires new ideas and new knowledge, but it is easily for firms to lead to "locking" in the technology because of too much proximity. Firms have a tendency to move to outlying cluster to improve the consumer appeal of their products. Therefore, firms need to balance the positive and negative effects of proximity on innovation in the cluster so as to achieve the maximum innovation performance.
Thirdly, this paper studies the high-tech industries and discuses the theory mechanism and the economic effects of geographical proximity, organizational proximity and technological proximity on the innovation performance of high-tech industries. The High-tech industries are tacit knowledge-intensive, the degree of resource flowing fast and strong cross-industry, and proximity is conducive to knowledge spillovers and flows between high-tech industries. This paper examines the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technical proximity effect on high-tech industries innovation by using double logarithmic production function type of regional innovation and innovative input and output data in China's provincial high-tech industries. The results show that:The innovation performance of high-tech industries is relevant to not only R&D expenditure and human capital investment within the regions, but also a strong links with its activities in the neighboring region, thus confirming the important role of the geographical proximity (including the geographical proximity in the regional level) on knowledge spillovers and innovation in high-tech industries. R&D expenditure and human capital investment have different roles on knowledge spillover. The regional R&D expenditures make localized knowledge spillovers, but the R&D funding for high-tech industries in the neighboring regions has no positive spillover effects, and the human capital investment in the neighboring regions and non-adjacent region's has significant positive effect on the knowledge spillover and innovation, which also confirmed the importance of the temporary geographical proximity in flows human capital and knowledge spillovers, but also implied the importance of the establishment and improvement of regional high-tech industries network of organizations and the roles of the organizational proximity in knowledge spillover. Under the technical non-neutral conditions, the polarization effects of the high-tech industries in the same field of technology for specialized production and management activities will also affect innovation performance. Under the introduction of technological proximity parameters, the empirical research on this paper shows that: Technological proximity shows a significant positive impact on knowledge spillover and innovation, but the human capital investments in adjacent areas have reduced the impact on innovation, which also shows that technological proximity and the geographical proximity are not a replacement channel for knowledge spillovers, the technological proximity and the geographical proximity are complementary and mutually staggered relationship, which together exert influence on innovation performance.
Fourthly, this paper analyzes the relationships among the proximity, knowledge spillovers and regional innovation system. The interaction of the economic agents within the regional innovative system and the linkages with the external regions determines the value of regional networks and regional economic operation quality. In order to reveal the important roles of the proximity on the regional innovative system, the paper analyzes the internal and external links of regional innovative system and the role of the business activities of entrepreneurs and knowledge-based new firms (NKBFs) in regional innovation system. It discusses the proximity effects on knowledge spillovers and the innovative performance in regional innovative systems from the geographical proximity, the organizational proximity and the technological proximity. According to the above theoretical analysis, the paper empirically analyzes of the relationship among proximity, knowledge spillovers and regional innovation system, which based on a sample of the Zhongguancun Science Park. The results of the study show that:Proximity is conducive to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial activities of high-level talent, especially for the knowledge-based new enterprises founded by the returned students play an important role for the internal and external links in Zhongguancun regional innovation system and innovation. Therefore, fostering the spirit of entrepreneurship, introducing high-level overseas returnee's start-ups are important partes in the construction of the regional innovation system.
Finally, the paper summarizes the relationship among the proximity, knowledge spillover and innovation. And it suggests the innovative policies on firms, high-tech industries, and regional innovation system from the perspective of proximity.
引文
[1]刘昌年,梅强,徐荣华.对我国企业作为技术创新主体的再认识.统计与决策,2005,(9)：74-75
[2]李晓梅,夏茂森.中国高技术产业创新绩效的地区差异.技术经济与管理研究,2010,(4)：37-40
[3]陈占永,李琳,李祖辉.我国区域创新绩效差异的动态分析.科技进步与对策,2010,27(13)：33-38
[4]曹再兴,罗能生,黄艳艳.我国区域创新同构的实证分析.科技进步与对策,2009,26(20)：32-36
[5]李明惠,綦振法.我国中小企业集群技术创新存在的问题及对策.工业技术经济,2006,25(7)：13-17
[6]王永杰,冷伟.创新与知识经济.四川：西南交通大学出版社,2005,2-3
[7]Torre A, Gilly J P. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies,2000,34(2):169-180
[8]杨云彦.区域经济学.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006,31-34
[9]阿尔弗雷德·韦伯.工业区位论.李刚剑,陈志人,张英保译.北京：商务印书馆,1997,110-123
[10]Marshall A. Principles of economics. (Fist published in 1890). Cambridge University Press,1961,15-20
[11]迈克尔·波特.国家竞争优势.李明轩,邱如美译.北京：华夏出版社,2002,139-150
[12]吴玉鸣.中国区域研发、知识溢出与创新的空间计量经济研究.北京：人民出版社,2007,187
[13]Cornish S L. Product innovation and the spatial dynamics of market intelligence: does proximity to markets matter? Economic Geography.1997,73(2):143-165
[14]Bottazzi L. Globalization and local proximity in innovation:a dynamic process. European Economic Review,2001,45(4-6):731-741
[15]Beugelsdijk S, Cornet M.'A far friend is worth more than a good neighbour' proximity and innovation in a small country. Journal of Management and Governance,2002,6(2):169-188
[16]Henny R, Mike A. Innovation, networking and proximity:lessons from small high technology firms in the UK. Regional Studies,2002,36(1):81-86
[17]Jonsson O. Innovation processes and proximity:the case of Ideon firms in Lund, Sweden. European Planning Studies,2002,10(6):705-722
[18]Freel M S. Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Research Policy,2003,32(5):751-770
[19]Jordan D, O'Leary E. The roles of interaction and proximity for innovation by Irish high-technology businesses:policy implications. ESRI Quarterly Economic Commentary,2005,86-100
[20]Kirat, Lung. Innovation and proximity:territories as loci of collective learning processes. European Urban & Regional Studies,1999,6(1):27-38
[21]Meister C, Weaker C. Physical and organizational proximity in territorial innovation system. Journal of Economic Geography,2004,4(1):1-2
[22]Kevin M. The exaggerated death of geography:learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. Journal of Economic Geography,2004,4(1):3-21
[23]Alderman N. Innovation in complex capital projects:clustering and dispersion in two cases from Argentina and the UK. Journal of Economic Geography, 2004,4(1):65-82
[24]Joachim S. The evolution of the Clyde region's shipbuilding innovation system in the second half of the nineteenth century. Journal of Economic Geography, 2004,4(1):83-101
[25]Shaila M M, Pamela E C. Innovation diffusion and e-collaboration:the effects of social proximity on social information processing. International Journal of e-Collaboration,2005,1(3)35-37
[26]Boschma R. Proximity and innovation:a critical assessment. Regional Studies-Abingdon,2005,39(1):61-74
[27]Martin M, Tanguy C, Albert P. Innovation capacity of agro-food firms and insertion in networks:the role of organisational proximity. Economie rurale, 2006,292:35-49
[28]Boufaden N, Plunket A. Proximity and innovation:do biotechnology firms located in the Paris region benefit from localized technological externalities? Annales d'Economie et de Statistique,2007,(87-88):197-220
[29]Rolf S. Entrepreneurship, proximity and regional innovation systems. Journal of Economic & Social Geography,2007,98(5):652-666
[30]Jerker M, Ola J. Knowledge collaboration and proximity the spatial organization of biotech innovation projects. European Urban & Regional Studies,2007,14(2): 115-131
[31]Zeller C.'North Atlantic Innovative relations of Swiss pharmaceuticals and the proximities with regional biotech arenas', Economic Geography,2004,80 (1): 83-111
[32]Lagendijk A, Lorentzen A. Proximity, knowledge and innovation in peripheral regions. On the intersection between geographical and organizational proximity. European Planning Studies,2007,15(4):457-466
[33]Torre A, Rallet A.'Proximity and localization'. Regional Studies,2005,39 (1): 47-60
[34]Jean-Marc Callois. The two sides of proximity in industrial clusters:the trade-off between process and product innovation. Journal of Urban Economics, 2008,63(1):146-162
[35]Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Vicente J. The scientific trajectory of the French school of proximity:interaction-and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. European Planning Studies,2008,16(5):617-628
[36]Silvestre Bruno dos Santos, Dalcol Paulo Roberto Tavares.Geographical proximity and innovation:evidences from the Campos basin oil & gas industrial agglomeration-Brazil. Technovation,2009,29(8):829-844
[37]Massard N, Mehier C. Proximity and innovation through an'accessibility to knowledge'lens. Regional Studies,2009,43(1):77-88
[38]Petrou A, Daskalopoulou, Irene. Innovation and small firms'growth prospects: relational proximity and knowledge dynamics in a low-tech industry. European Planning Studies,2009,17(11):1591-1604
[39]魏欣仪.厂商跨界学习能力——“邻近性”观点回顾与研究途径的建议.世界地理研究,2005,14(4)：1-8
[40]汪旭晖.国际零售商海外市场选择标准过程与趋势展望.市场营销导刊,2005,(6)：28-31
[41]陈广胜,许小忠,徐燕椿.区域创新体系的内涵特征与主要类型：文献综述.浙江社会科学,2006,(3)：23-29
[42]饶扬德,李福刚.地理邻近性与创新：区域知识流动与集体学习视角.中国科技论坛,2006,(6)：20-24
[43]王孝斌,李福刚.地理邻近在区域创新中的作用机理及其启示.经济地理,2007,27(4)：543-552
[44]何静,刘刚.从嵌入性视角论知识创新与转移.无锡商业职业技术学院学报,2006,6(5)：40-42
[45]李福刚,王学军.地理邻近性与创新关系探讨.中国人口资源与环境,2007,(3)：35-39
[46]梁辉.信息社会中邻近效应对区际关系的影响——从技术扩散的视角.经济论坛,2008,(22)：4-7
[47]李琳,韩宝龙.组织合作中的多维邻近性：西方文献评述与思考.社会科学家,2009,(7)：1 08-112
[48]汪涛,曾刚.地理邻近与上海浦东高技术企业创新活动研究——兼比较德国下萨克森州.世界地理研究,2008,17(1)：47-52
[49]汪明峰,李健.互联网、产业集群与全球生产网络——新的信息和通讯技术对产业空间组织的影响.人文地理,2009,(2)：17-22
[50]韩宝龙,李琳,刘昱含.地理邻近性对高新区创新绩效影响效应的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2010,27(17)：40-43
[51]Simmie J. Innovation and space:a critical review of the literature. Regional Studies,2005,39(6):789-804
[52]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review,1996,86(3):630-640
[53]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.何谓,易家详,张军扩等译.北京：商务印书馆,1997,2-3
[54]Schumpeter J A. Business cycles:a theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York Toronto London:McGraw-Hill Book Company,1939,219-240
[55]丁焕峰.区域创新理论的形成与发展.科技管理研究,2007,(9)：18-21
[56]Marshall A. Principles of economics. (Fist published in 1890). Cambridge University Press,1961,15-20
[57]Scitovsky T. Two concepts of external economies, in Agarwala A. N and Singh S. P. (Eds) The Economics of Underdevelopment, Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1963,295-308
[58]Vernon R. International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1966,80:190-207
[59]Saxenian A L. The origins and dynamics of production network in Silicon Valley. Research Policy,1991,(20):423-437
[60]陈柳钦.国内外关于产业集群技术创新环境研究综述.贵州师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(5)：6-14
[61]Lawson C. Territorial clustering and high technology innovation:from industrial districts to innovative milieux. CBR Working Paper,1997,(54):1-40
[62]Granovetter M. Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3):481-510
[63]Coase R H. The nature of the firm. Economica New Series.1937,4(16):386-405
[64]Williamson Q E. Market and hierarchies:some elementary considerations. The American Economic Review,1973,63(2):316-325
[65]Scott A J. Technopolis:high-technology industry and regional development in Southern California. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press,1993, 203-220
[66]Scott A J, Storper M. High-technology industry and regional development:a theoretical critique and reconstruction. International Social Science Journal, 1987,39(2):215-232
[67]Scott A J. Location processes, urbanization, and territorial development:an exploratory essay. Environment and Planning,1985,17(4):479-501
[68]Scott A J. High technology industry and regional development:the rise of the Orange County complex 1955-1984. Urban Geography,1986,(7):3-45
[69]Cooke P, Morgan K. The network paradigm:new departures in corporate and regional development. Environment and Planning,1993,11 (5):543-564
[70]刘志高,尹贻梅.演化经济地理学：当代西方经济地理学发展的新方向.国外社会科学,2006,(1)：34-39
[71]理查德·R·纳尔逊,悉尼·G·温特.经济变迁的演化理论.胡世凯译.北京：商务印书馆,1987,29-448
[72]田育飞.区域创新系统理论研究述评.合作经济与科技,2007,323：22-23
[73]Lundvall B A. "National systems of innovation:towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning". London:Pinter Publishers,1992,1-19
[74]Nelson R R. National innovation systems:a comparative analysis. USA:Oxford University Press,1993,1-560
[75]Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Jerome V. The scientific trajectory of the French school of proximity:interaction-and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. European Planning Studies,2008,16(5):617-620
[76]Surinach J, Moreno R, Vaya E. Knowledge externalities, innovation clusters and regional development. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,2007,61-87
[77]Torre A, Gilly J P. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies,2000,34.2:169-180
[78]Knoben J, Oerlemans L A G. Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration:a literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews,2006,8(2): 71-89
[79]Jordi Surinach, Rosina Moreno, Esther Vaya. Knowledge externalities, innovation clusters and regional development. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,2007,61-90
[80]Rallet A, Torre A. Is geographical proximity necessary in the innovation networks in the era of global economy? GeoJournal,2000,49(4):373-380
[81]Maskell P, Bathelt H, Malmberg A. Building global knowledge pipelines:the role of temporary clusters. European Planning Studies,2006,14(8):997-1013
[82]Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P. Clusters and knowledge:local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 2004,28(1):31-56
[83]陈郁.企业制度与市场组织——交易费用经济学文选.上海：上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1996,24-63
[84]蒋自强,史晋川,当代西方经济学流派.第二版.上海：复旦大学出版社,2001,263-266
[85]张小蒂,王焕祥.国际投资与跨国公司.浙江：浙江大学出版社,2004,153-154
[86]Wuyts S, Colombo M G, Dutta S et al. Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization,2005,58(2):277-302
[87]周立军,何自力.基于认知和知识的互动创新研究.情报研究,2008,(1)：6-9
[88]Fagerberg J. Innovation:a guide to the literature. In Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, editors. The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press,2005,1-26
[89]Rosenberg N. Inside the black box:technology and economics. Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press,1982,163-193
[90]Dosi G. The nature of the innovative process. In Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R et al, editors. London:Printer,1988a,221-238
[91]Cantwell J, Fai F. Firms as the source of innovation and growth:the evolution of technological competence. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1999,9(3):331-366
[92]Nelson R R. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal,1991,(12):61-74
[93]Penrose E T. The theory of the growth of the firm.3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1995,8-27
[94]Prahalad C, Hamel G. The core competence of the corporation. Havard Business Review,1990,68(3):79-91
[95]Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity:a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1):128-152
[96]Wang C L., Ahmed, P K. Dynamic capabilities:a review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews,2007,9(1):31-51
[97]Teece D J, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7):509-533
[98]Montgomery C A. Product-market diversification and market power. Academy of Management Journal,1985,28(4):789-798
[99]Garcia-Vega M. Does technological diversification promote innovation?:An empirical analysis for European firms. Research Policy,2006,35(2):230-246
[100]Pandya A M, Rao N V. Diversification and firm performance:An empirical evaluation. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions,1998,11(2):67-81
[101]Duysters G, Hagedoorn J. Core competences and company performance in the world-wide computer industry. Journal of High Technology Management Research,2000,11(1):75-91
[102]Keller W. International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004,42(3):752-782
[103]Polanyi M. Tacit knowing in the tacit dimension. New York:Doubleday and Company inc,1966,3-25
[104]薛亮.野中郁次郎的知识转化理论综述.北京师范大学经管学刊,2005,(6)：75-87
[105]Nonaka Ikujiro. The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 1991,69(6):96-104
[106]Maskell P, Malmberg A. Localised learning and industrial competitiveness. Cambridge Journal of Economics,1999,23(2):167-85
[107]Romer P M. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98(5):S71-S102
[108]彭国华.内生增长理论发展综述.经济前沿,2009,(6)：94-99
[109]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy,1991b,99(3):483-499
[110]Levin R C., Klevorick A K., Nelson R R. et al. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1987,(3):783-831
[111]Audretsch D B. Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,1998,14(2):18-29
[112]Cassiman B, Veugelers R. R&D cooperation and spillovers:some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review,2002,92(4):1169-1184
[113]Giuri P, Mariani M, Brusoni S et al. Inventors and invention processes in Europe: results from the patval-eu survey. Research Policy,2007,36(8):1107-1127
[114]Mansfield E. How rapidly does new industrial technology leak out? Journal of Industrial Economics,1985,34(2):217-223
[115]Koo J. Technology spillovers, agglomeration, and regional economic development. Journal of Planning Literature,2005,20(2):99-115
[116]D6ring T, Schnellenbach J. What do we know about geographical knowledge spillovers and regional growth?:A survey of the literature. Regional Studies, 2006,40(3):375-395
[117]Simmie J. Innovation and space:A critical review of the literature. Regional Studies,2005,39(6):789-804
[118]Malmberg A, Maskell P. Localized learning revisited. Growth and Change,2006, 37(1):1-18
[119]Iammarino S, McCann P. The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: Transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers. Research Policy,2006,35(7): 1018-1036
[120]王缉慈等.创新的空间：企业集群与区域发展.北京：北京大学出版社,2001,1-360
[121]黎振强,杨勇,罗能生.长株潭新型工业化进程统计测度及实证分析.科技管理研究,2008,(12)：209-211
[122]Storper M, Scott A. The wealth of regions:Market forces and policy imperatives in local and global context. Futures,1995,27(5):505-526
[123]Porter M E. Location, competition and economic development:Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly,2000,14(1):15-34
[124]Malmberg A, Power D. (how) do (firms in) clusters create knowledge? Industry and Innovation,2005,12(4):409-431
[125]Jaffe A B, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1993,108(3):577-598
[126]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation. In Henderson J V, Thisse J, editors. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Elsevier,2004,(4):2713-2739
[127]Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z. Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 1997,42(3):422-448
[128]Peri G. Determinants of knowledge flows and their effect on innovation. Review of Economics and Statistics,2005,87(2):308-322
[129]Martin R, Sunley P. Deconstructing clusters:Chaotic concept or policy panacea? Journal of Economic Geography,2003,3(1):5-35
[130]Dumais G, Ellison G, Glaeser E L. Geographic concentration as a dynamic process. Review of Economics and Statistics,2002,84(2):193-20
[131]Hansen M T. The search-transfer problem:The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(1):82-111
[132]Grabher G, Stark D. Organizing diversity:Evolutionary theory, network analysis and postsocialism. Regional Studies,1997,31(5):533-544
[133]Nooteboom B. Learning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2000,151-169
[134]Desrochers P. Local diversity, human creativity, and technological innovation. Growth and Change,2001,32(3):369-394
[135]Arrow K. The Economic implication of learning by doing. Review of Economic Studies,1962,29(80):155-173
[136]Romer P M. Increasing returns and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy,1986,94(5):1002-1037
[137]Ejermo O. Technological diversity and Jacobs'externality hypothesis revisited. Growth and Change,2005,36(2):167-195
[138]王立平.吕民乐.知识溢出的规模经济、范围经济与连结经济.科学经济社会,2005,(4)：39-42
[139]Suedekum J, Blien U. Local economic structure and industry development in Germany,1993-2001. Economics Bulletin,2005,15(17):1-8
[140]Cantner U, Graf H. Cooperation and specialization in German technology regions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2004,14(5):543-562
[141]Fritsch M. Slavtchev V. Industry specialization, diversity and the efficiency of regional innovation systems. Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics. Jena Economic Research Papers in Economics,2007, (18):1-27
[142]Van der Panne G, Van Beers C. On the marshall-jacobs controversy:it takes two to tango. Industrial and Corporate Change,2006,15(5):877-890
[143]Nooteboom B, Van Haverbeke W, Duysters G et al. Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy,2007,36(7):1016-1034
[144]Jaffe A B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D:Evidence from firms'patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review,1986, 76(5):984-1001
[145]Autant-Bernard C. The geography of knowledge spillovers and technological proximity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2001,10(4):237-254
[146]Adams J D, Jaffe A B. Bounding the effects of R&D:An investigation using matched establishment-firm data. RAND Journal of Economics,1996,72(4): 700-721
[147]Orlando M J. Measuring spillovers from industrial R&D:On the importance of geographic and technological proximity. RAND Journal of Economics,2004, 35(4):777-786
[148]Ogawa H, Fujita M. Equilibrium land-use patterns in a non-monocentric city. Journal of Regional Science,1980,20(4):455-475
[149]Long N V, Soubeyran A. R&D spillovers and location choice under Cournot rivalry. Pacific Economic Review,1998,3(2):105-119
[150]Duranton G, Puga D. Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies, in: Henderson J V, Thisse J F. (Eds.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics: Cities and Geography, Elsevier/North-Holland, Amsterdam,2004,4:2852-2904
[151]Fujita M, Thisse J F. Economics of agglomeration-cities, industrial location and regional growth. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,2004,267-286
[152]Portes A, Landolt P. The downside of social capital. The American Prospect, 1996,(26):18-21
[153]Uzzi B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations. American Sociological Review,1996,61(4): 674-698
[154]Uzzi B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital:How social relations and network benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 1999,64(4):481-505
[155]Belleflamme P, Picard P, Thisse J F. An economic theory of regional clusters. Journal of Urban Economics,2000,48(1):158-184
[156]Soubeyran A, Weber S. District formation and local social capital:A (tacit) co-option approach. Journal of Urban Economics,2002,52(1):65-92
[157]Basevi G, Ottaviano G. The district and the global economy:Exportation versus foreign location. Journal of Regional Science,2002,42(1):107-126
[158]Maskell P, Malmberg A. Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution. Journal of Economic Geography,2007,7(5):603-618
[159]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy,1991,99(3):483-499
[160]Burt R S. The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behaviour,1990,(22):345-423
[161]张倩难.谈高技术产业创新的基本特征与过程机制.商业时代,2009,(19)：107-108
[162]黎振强,罗能生.积极发展信用服务业.经济日报(理论周刊),2009-09-07
[163]谢卸林.高技术产业的特点Bjkp.gov.cn,2003-08-07
[164]Garnsey E, Smith H L. Proximity and complexity in the emergence of high technology industry:The Oxbridge comparison.Geoforum,1998,29(4):433-450
[165]Bilbao-Ubillos J, Camino-Beldarrain V. Proximity matters? European Union enlargement and relocation of activities:The case of the Spanish automotive industry. Economic Development Quarterly,2008,22(2):149-166
[166]Jansson J. Inside the internet industry:The importance of proximity in accessing knowledge in the agglomeration of internet firms in Stockholm. European planning studies,2008,16(2):211-228
[167]Maskell P. Low-tech competitive advantages and the role of proximity:The Danish wooden furniture industry. European urban and regional studies,1998, 5(2):99-118
[168]Lublinski A. Does geographic proximity matter? Evidence from clustered and non-clustered aeronautic firms in Germany. Regional Studies,2003,37(5): 453-467
[169]Cooke P, Ehret O. Proximity and procurement:A study of agglomeration in the Welsh aerospace industry. European planning studies,2009,17(4):549-569
[170]Heanue K, Jacobson D. Organizational proximity and iInstitutional learning: The evolution of a spatially dispersed network in the Irish furniture industry. International Studies of Management & Organization,2001-2002,31(4):56-72
[171]Klein J L, Tremblay D G, Fontan J M. Local systems and productive networks in the economic conversion:The case of Montreal. Geographie, Economie, Societe, 2003,5(1):59-75
[172]Watson A. Global music city:Knowledge and geographical proximity in London's recorded music industry. Area,2008,40(1):12-23
[173]Vale M, Caldeira J. Proximity and knowledge governance in localized production systems:The footwear industry in the north region of Portugal. European Planning Studies,2007,15(4):531-548
[174]Petruzzelli A M, Albino V, Carbonara N. External knowledge sources and proximity. Journal of Knowledge Management,2009,13(5):301-318
[175]Petrou A, Daskalopoulou I. Innovation and small firms'growth prospects: relational proximity and knowledge dynamics in a low-tech industry. European Planning Studies,2009,17(11):1591-1604
[176]王立平.我国高校R&D知识溢出的实证研究——以高技术产业为例.中国软科学,2005,(12)：54-59
[177]Kesidou E. Knowledge spillovers in high-tech clusters in developing countries. Globelics Academy,2004,(3):59-67
[178]朱美光,韩伯棠,徐春杰等.知识溢出与高新区科技人力资本流动研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2005,(5)：100-104
[179]马歇尔.经济学原理.彭逸林,王威辉,商金艳译.第一版.北京：人民日报出版社,2009,323-356
[180]Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators:a survey. Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28(4):1661-1707
[181]Feldman M P, Florida R. The geographic sources of innovation:Technological infrastructure and product innovation in the United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,1994,84(2):210-229
[182]Liu X H, Buck T. Innovation performance and channels for international technology spillovers:Evidence from Chinese high-tech industries. Research Policy,2007,36(3):355-366
[183]Autant-Bernard C. The geography of knowledge spillovers and technological proximity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2001,10(4):237-254
[184]Antonelli C. Technological districts localized spillovers and productivity growth: The Italian evidence on technological externalities in the core region. International Review of Applied Economics,1994,18(1):18-20
[185]Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z. Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 1997,42(3):422-448
[186]Zucker L G, Darby M R, Armstrong J. Intellectual capital and the firm:the technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers. NBER working paper,1994,4946:1-59
[187]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review.1996,86(3):630-640
[188]Jaffe A B. Real effects of academic research. The American Review,1989,79(5): 957-970
[189]陈丹宇.区域创新系统研究的回顾与评述.科技进步与对策,2007,24(8)：207
[190]Cooke P M, Heidenreich, Braczyk H J. Regional innovation system:the role of governance in a globalized word. London/New York:Routledge,2004,(3):1-400
[191]Edquist C. Systems of innovation:perspectives and challenges. In:Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, eds, The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2005,181-208
[192]Asheim B T, Gertler M S. The geography of innovation:regional innovation systems. In:Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, eds, The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005,291-317
[193]Howells J R L. Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic Geography, Urban Studies 2002,39(5-6):871-884
[194]Amin A. Spatialitis of globalisation. Environment and Planning,2002,34(3): 385-399
[195]Mackinnon D, Cumbers A, Chapman K. Learning, innovation and regional development:A critical appraisal of recent debates. Progress in Human Geography,2002,26(3):293-311
[196]Saxenian A. The new Argonauts:regional advantage in a global economy. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press,2006,48-81
[197]Sternberg R. Entrepreneurship in German regions and the policy dimension. In: Audretsch D B, Grimm H, Wessner C W, eds, Local heroes in the global village. Globalization and new entrepreneurship policies, New York:Springer,2005, 113-144
[198]Fritsch M. Enterprise-university co-operation and the role of public research institutions in regional innovation systems. Industry and Innovation,1999,6(1): 69-83
[199]Wong P K, Ho Y P, Autio E. Entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth: evidence from GEM data. Small Business Economics,2005,24(3):335-350
[200]Stel A van, Carree M, Thurik R. The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth. Small Business Economics,2005,24(3):311-321
[201]Fritsch M P, Mueller C. The effects of new business formation on regional development over Time. Regional Studies,2004,38(7):961-975
[202]Rocha H, Sternberg R. Entrepreneurship:The role of clusters; theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence from Germany. Small Business Economics, 2005,24(3):267-292
[203]Toms, Steven. Accounting for entrepreneurship:A knowledge-based view of the firm. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,2006,17(2):336-357
[204]Woiceshyn, J. Value creation in knowledge-based firms:Aligning problems and resources. Academy of Management Perspectives,2008,22(2):85-99
[205]Carroll E, Elsie. The growth of knowledge-based small firms in Monterrey, Mexico. (Cover story). Texas Business Review,2008,1-6
[206]Acs Z J, Plummer L A. Penetrating the'knowledge filter'in regional economies. The Annals of Regional Science,2005,39(3):439-456
[207]Zucker L G, Darby M R, Brewer M B. Intellectual human capital and the birth of the U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review,1998,88(1): 290-306
[208]Florida R. The economic geography of talent. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,2002,92(4):741-755
[209]Cooke P. Regional innovation, entrepreneurship and talent systems. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management,2007,7 (2-5):117-139
[210]Ibata-Arens, Kathryn. The Kyoto model of innovation and entrepreneurship: Regional innovation systems and cluster culture. Prometheus,2008,26(1): 89-109
[211]Baronet J, Riverin, Nathaly. The impact of regional innovation systems on the level of corporate entrepreneurship activity. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business,2010,10(3):359-385
[212]Saxenian A. Silicon Valley's new immigrant entrepreneurs. Economic Development Quarterly,2002,16(1):20-32
[213]黎振强,杨勇,罗能生.基于动态博弈的科技型中小企业合作创新行为分析.上海经济研究,2008,(6)：101-106
[214]黎振强,罗能生.建立健全社会信用体系.经济日报(理论与实践),2009-04-06
[215]拜瑞·J·内勒夫,亚当·M·布兰登勃格.合作竞争.王煜昆,王煜全译.合肥：安徽人民出版社,2000,2-3
[216]王缉慈.地方产业群战略.中国工业经济,2002,(3)：47-54
[217]王缉慈.关于发展创新型产业集群的政策建议.经济地理,2004,(4)：433-436
[218]周其仁.市场里的企业：一个人力资本与非人力资本的特别合约.经济研究,1996,(7)：71-79
[219]王丽敏,肖昆,项晶.企业家精神理论的演化与新进展.经济师,2010,(7)：25
[220]吴敬琏.制度重于技术——论发展我国高新技术产业.经济社会体制比较,1999,(5)：1-6
[2]李晓梅,夏茂森.中国高技术产业创新绩效的地区差异.技术经济与管理研究,2010,(4)：37-40
[3]陈占永,李琳,李祖辉.我国区域创新绩效差异的动态分析.科技进步与对策,2010,27(13)：33-38
[4]曹再兴,罗能生,黄艳艳.我国区域创新同构的实证分析.科技进步与对策,2009,26(20)：32-36
[5]李明惠,綦振法.我国中小企业集群技术创新存在的问题及对策.工业技术经济,2006,25(7)：13-17
[6]王永杰,冷伟.创新与知识经济.四川：西南交通大学出版社,2005,2-3
[7]Torre A, Gilly J P. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies,2000,34(2):169-180
[8]杨云彦.区域经济学.北京：中国财政经济出版社,2006,31-34
[9]阿尔弗雷德·韦伯.工业区位论.李刚剑,陈志人,张英保译.北京：商务印书馆,1997,110-123
[10]Marshall A. Principles of economics. (Fist published in 1890). Cambridge University Press,1961,15-20
[11]迈克尔·波特.国家竞争优势.李明轩,邱如美译.北京：华夏出版社,2002,139-150
[12]吴玉鸣.中国区域研发、知识溢出与创新的空间计量经济研究.北京：人民出版社,2007,187
[13]Cornish S L. Product innovation and the spatial dynamics of market intelligence: does proximity to markets matter? Economic Geography.1997,73(2):143-165
[14]Bottazzi L. Globalization and local proximity in innovation:a dynamic process. European Economic Review,2001,45(4-6):731-741
[15]Beugelsdijk S, Cornet M.'A far friend is worth more than a good neighbour' proximity and innovation in a small country. Journal of Management and Governance,2002,6(2):169-188
[16]Henny R, Mike A. Innovation, networking and proximity:lessons from small high technology firms in the UK. Regional Studies,2002,36(1):81-86
[17]Jonsson O. Innovation processes and proximity:the case of Ideon firms in Lund, Sweden. European Planning Studies,2002,10(6):705-722
[18]Freel M S. Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Research Policy,2003,32(5):751-770
[19]Jordan D, O'Leary E. The roles of interaction and proximity for innovation by Irish high-technology businesses:policy implications. ESRI Quarterly Economic Commentary,2005,86-100
[20]Kirat, Lung. Innovation and proximity:territories as loci of collective learning processes. European Urban & Regional Studies,1999,6(1):27-38
[21]Meister C, Weaker C. Physical and organizational proximity in territorial innovation system. Journal of Economic Geography,2004,4(1):1-2
[22]Kevin M. The exaggerated death of geography:learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. Journal of Economic Geography,2004,4(1):3-21
[23]Alderman N. Innovation in complex capital projects:clustering and dispersion in two cases from Argentina and the UK. Journal of Economic Geography, 2004,4(1):65-82
[24]Joachim S. The evolution of the Clyde region's shipbuilding innovation system in the second half of the nineteenth century. Journal of Economic Geography, 2004,4(1):83-101
[25]Shaila M M, Pamela E C. Innovation diffusion and e-collaboration:the effects of social proximity on social information processing. International Journal of e-Collaboration,2005,1(3)35-37
[26]Boschma R. Proximity and innovation:a critical assessment. Regional Studies-Abingdon,2005,39(1):61-74
[27]Martin M, Tanguy C, Albert P. Innovation capacity of agro-food firms and insertion in networks:the role of organisational proximity. Economie rurale, 2006,292:35-49
[28]Boufaden N, Plunket A. Proximity and innovation:do biotechnology firms located in the Paris region benefit from localized technological externalities? Annales d'Economie et de Statistique,2007,(87-88):197-220
[29]Rolf S. Entrepreneurship, proximity and regional innovation systems. Journal of Economic & Social Geography,2007,98(5):652-666
[30]Jerker M, Ola J. Knowledge collaboration and proximity the spatial organization of biotech innovation projects. European Urban & Regional Studies,2007,14(2): 115-131
[31]Zeller C.'North Atlantic Innovative relations of Swiss pharmaceuticals and the proximities with regional biotech arenas', Economic Geography,2004,80 (1): 83-111
[32]Lagendijk A, Lorentzen A. Proximity, knowledge and innovation in peripheral regions. On the intersection between geographical and organizational proximity. European Planning Studies,2007,15(4):457-466
[33]Torre A, Rallet A.'Proximity and localization'. Regional Studies,2005,39 (1): 47-60
[34]Jean-Marc Callois. The two sides of proximity in industrial clusters:the trade-off between process and product innovation. Journal of Urban Economics, 2008,63(1):146-162
[35]Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Vicente J. The scientific trajectory of the French school of proximity:interaction-and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. European Planning Studies,2008,16(5):617-628
[36]Silvestre Bruno dos Santos, Dalcol Paulo Roberto Tavares.Geographical proximity and innovation:evidences from the Campos basin oil & gas industrial agglomeration-Brazil. Technovation,2009,29(8):829-844
[37]Massard N, Mehier C. Proximity and innovation through an'accessibility to knowledge'lens. Regional Studies,2009,43(1):77-88
[38]Petrou A, Daskalopoulou, Irene. Innovation and small firms'growth prospects: relational proximity and knowledge dynamics in a low-tech industry. European Planning Studies,2009,17(11):1591-1604
[39]魏欣仪.厂商跨界学习能力——“邻近性”观点回顾与研究途径的建议.世界地理研究,2005,14(4)：1-8
[40]汪旭晖.国际零售商海外市场选择标准过程与趋势展望.市场营销导刊,2005,(6)：28-31
[41]陈广胜,许小忠,徐燕椿.区域创新体系的内涵特征与主要类型：文献综述.浙江社会科学,2006,(3)：23-29
[42]饶扬德,李福刚.地理邻近性与创新：区域知识流动与集体学习视角.中国科技论坛,2006,(6)：20-24
[43]王孝斌,李福刚.地理邻近在区域创新中的作用机理及其启示.经济地理,2007,27(4)：543-552
[44]何静,刘刚.从嵌入性视角论知识创新与转移.无锡商业职业技术学院学报,2006,6(5)：40-42
[45]李福刚,王学军.地理邻近性与创新关系探讨.中国人口资源与环境,2007,(3)：35-39
[46]梁辉.信息社会中邻近效应对区际关系的影响——从技术扩散的视角.经济论坛,2008,(22)：4-7
[47]李琳,韩宝龙.组织合作中的多维邻近性：西方文献评述与思考.社会科学家,2009,(7)：1 08-112
[48]汪涛,曾刚.地理邻近与上海浦东高技术企业创新活动研究——兼比较德国下萨克森州.世界地理研究,2008,17(1)：47-52
[49]汪明峰,李健.互联网、产业集群与全球生产网络——新的信息和通讯技术对产业空间组织的影响.人文地理,2009,(2)：17-22
[50]韩宝龙,李琳,刘昱含.地理邻近性对高新区创新绩效影响效应的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2010,27(17)：40-43
[51]Simmie J. Innovation and space:a critical review of the literature. Regional Studies,2005,39(6):789-804
[52]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review,1996,86(3):630-640
[53]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.何谓,易家详,张军扩等译.北京：商务印书馆,1997,2-3
[54]Schumpeter J A. Business cycles:a theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York Toronto London:McGraw-Hill Book Company,1939,219-240
[55]丁焕峰.区域创新理论的形成与发展.科技管理研究,2007,(9)：18-21
[56]Marshall A. Principles of economics. (Fist published in 1890). Cambridge University Press,1961,15-20
[57]Scitovsky T. Two concepts of external economies, in Agarwala A. N and Singh S. P. (Eds) The Economics of Underdevelopment, Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1963,295-308
[58]Vernon R. International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1966,80:190-207
[59]Saxenian A L. The origins and dynamics of production network in Silicon Valley. Research Policy,1991,(20):423-437
[60]陈柳钦.国内外关于产业集群技术创新环境研究综述.贵州师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(5)：6-14
[61]Lawson C. Territorial clustering and high technology innovation:from industrial districts to innovative milieux. CBR Working Paper,1997,(54):1-40
[62]Granovetter M. Economic action and social structure:the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology,1985,91(3):481-510
[63]Coase R H. The nature of the firm. Economica New Series.1937,4(16):386-405
[64]Williamson Q E. Market and hierarchies:some elementary considerations. The American Economic Review,1973,63(2):316-325
[65]Scott A J. Technopolis:high-technology industry and regional development in Southern California. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press,1993, 203-220
[66]Scott A J, Storper M. High-technology industry and regional development:a theoretical critique and reconstruction. International Social Science Journal, 1987,39(2):215-232
[67]Scott A J. Location processes, urbanization, and territorial development:an exploratory essay. Environment and Planning,1985,17(4):479-501
[68]Scott A J. High technology industry and regional development:the rise of the Orange County complex 1955-1984. Urban Geography,1986,(7):3-45
[69]Cooke P, Morgan K. The network paradigm:new departures in corporate and regional development. Environment and Planning,1993,11 (5):543-564
[70]刘志高,尹贻梅.演化经济地理学：当代西方经济地理学发展的新方向.国外社会科学,2006,(1)：34-39
[71]理查德·R·纳尔逊,悉尼·G·温特.经济变迁的演化理论.胡世凯译.北京：商务印书馆,1987,29-448
[72]田育飞.区域创新系统理论研究述评.合作经济与科技,2007,323：22-23
[73]Lundvall B A. "National systems of innovation:towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning". London:Pinter Publishers,1992,1-19
[74]Nelson R R. National innovation systems:a comparative analysis. USA:Oxford University Press,1993,1-560
[75]Carrincazeaux C, Lung Y, Jerome V. The scientific trajectory of the French school of proximity:interaction-and institution-based approaches to regional innovation systems. European Planning Studies,2008,16(5):617-620
[76]Surinach J, Moreno R, Vaya E. Knowledge externalities, innovation clusters and regional development. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,2007,61-87
[77]Torre A, Gilly J P. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional Studies,2000,34.2:169-180
[78]Knoben J, Oerlemans L A G. Proximity and inter-organizational collaboration:a literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews,2006,8(2): 71-89
[79]Jordi Surinach, Rosina Moreno, Esther Vaya. Knowledge externalities, innovation clusters and regional development. UK:Edward Elgar Publishing Limited,2007,61-90
[80]Rallet A, Torre A. Is geographical proximity necessary in the innovation networks in the era of global economy? GeoJournal,2000,49(4):373-380
[81]Maskell P, Bathelt H, Malmberg A. Building global knowledge pipelines:the role of temporary clusters. European Planning Studies,2006,14(8):997-1013
[82]Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P. Clusters and knowledge:local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 2004,28(1):31-56
[83]陈郁.企业制度与市场组织——交易费用经济学文选.上海：上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1996,24-63
[84]蒋自强,史晋川,当代西方经济学流派.第二版.上海：复旦大学出版社,2001,263-266
[85]张小蒂,王焕祥.国际投资与跨国公司.浙江：浙江大学出版社,2004,153-154
[86]Wuyts S, Colombo M G, Dutta S et al. Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization,2005,58(2):277-302
[87]周立军,何自力.基于认知和知识的互动创新研究.情报研究,2008,(1)：6-9
[88]Fagerberg J. Innovation:a guide to the literature. In Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, editors. The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press,2005,1-26
[89]Rosenberg N. Inside the black box:technology and economics. Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press,1982,163-193
[90]Dosi G. The nature of the innovative process. In Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R et al, editors. London:Printer,1988a,221-238
[91]Cantwell J, Fai F. Firms as the source of innovation and growth:the evolution of technological competence. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1999,9(3):331-366
[92]Nelson R R. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal,1991,(12):61-74
[93]Penrose E T. The theory of the growth of the firm.3rd edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1995,8-27
[94]Prahalad C, Hamel G. The core competence of the corporation. Havard Business Review,1990,68(3):79-91
[95]Cohen W M, Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity:a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly,1990,35(1):128-152
[96]Wang C L., Ahmed, P K. Dynamic capabilities:a review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews,2007,9(1):31-51
[97]Teece D J, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(7):509-533
[98]Montgomery C A. Product-market diversification and market power. Academy of Management Journal,1985,28(4):789-798
[99]Garcia-Vega M. Does technological diversification promote innovation?:An empirical analysis for European firms. Research Policy,2006,35(2):230-246
[100]Pandya A M, Rao N V. Diversification and firm performance:An empirical evaluation. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions,1998,11(2):67-81
[101]Duysters G, Hagedoorn J. Core competences and company performance in the world-wide computer industry. Journal of High Technology Management Research,2000,11(1):75-91
[102]Keller W. International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004,42(3):752-782
[103]Polanyi M. Tacit knowing in the tacit dimension. New York:Doubleday and Company inc,1966,3-25
[104]薛亮.野中郁次郎的知识转化理论综述.北京师范大学经管学刊,2005,(6)：75-87
[105]Nonaka Ikujiro. The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 1991,69(6):96-104
[106]Maskell P, Malmberg A. Localised learning and industrial competitiveness. Cambridge Journal of Economics,1999,23(2):167-85
[107]Romer P M. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98(5):S71-S102
[108]彭国华.内生增长理论发展综述.经济前沿,2009,(6)：94-99
[109]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy,1991b,99(3):483-499
[110]Levin R C., Klevorick A K., Nelson R R. et al. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1987,(3):783-831
[111]Audretsch D B. Agglomeration and the location of innovative activity. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,1998,14(2):18-29
[112]Cassiman B, Veugelers R. R&D cooperation and spillovers:some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review,2002,92(4):1169-1184
[113]Giuri P, Mariani M, Brusoni S et al. Inventors and invention processes in Europe: results from the patval-eu survey. Research Policy,2007,36(8):1107-1127
[114]Mansfield E. How rapidly does new industrial technology leak out? Journal of Industrial Economics,1985,34(2):217-223
[115]Koo J. Technology spillovers, agglomeration, and regional economic development. Journal of Planning Literature,2005,20(2):99-115
[116]D6ring T, Schnellenbach J. What do we know about geographical knowledge spillovers and regional growth?:A survey of the literature. Regional Studies, 2006,40(3):375-395
[117]Simmie J. Innovation and space:A critical review of the literature. Regional Studies,2005,39(6):789-804
[118]Malmberg A, Maskell P. Localized learning revisited. Growth and Change,2006, 37(1):1-18
[119]Iammarino S, McCann P. The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: Transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers. Research Policy,2006,35(7): 1018-1036
[120]王缉慈等.创新的空间：企业集群与区域发展.北京：北京大学出版社,2001,1-360
[121]黎振强,杨勇,罗能生.长株潭新型工业化进程统计测度及实证分析.科技管理研究,2008,(12)：209-211
[122]Storper M, Scott A. The wealth of regions:Market forces and policy imperatives in local and global context. Futures,1995,27(5):505-526
[123]Porter M E. Location, competition and economic development:Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly,2000,14(1):15-34
[124]Malmberg A, Power D. (how) do (firms in) clusters create knowledge? Industry and Innovation,2005,12(4):409-431
[125]Jaffe A B, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1993,108(3):577-598
[126]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation. In Henderson J V, Thisse J, editors. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Elsevier,2004,(4):2713-2739
[127]Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z. Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 1997,42(3):422-448
[128]Peri G. Determinants of knowledge flows and their effect on innovation. Review of Economics and Statistics,2005,87(2):308-322
[129]Martin R, Sunley P. Deconstructing clusters:Chaotic concept or policy panacea? Journal of Economic Geography,2003,3(1):5-35
[130]Dumais G, Ellison G, Glaeser E L. Geographic concentration as a dynamic process. Review of Economics and Statistics,2002,84(2):193-20
[131]Hansen M T. The search-transfer problem:The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999,44(1):82-111
[132]Grabher G, Stark D. Organizing diversity:Evolutionary theory, network analysis and postsocialism. Regional Studies,1997,31(5):533-544
[133]Nooteboom B. Learning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2000,151-169
[134]Desrochers P. Local diversity, human creativity, and technological innovation. Growth and Change,2001,32(3):369-394
[135]Arrow K. The Economic implication of learning by doing. Review of Economic Studies,1962,29(80):155-173
[136]Romer P M. Increasing returns and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy,1986,94(5):1002-1037
[137]Ejermo O. Technological diversity and Jacobs'externality hypothesis revisited. Growth and Change,2005,36(2):167-195
[138]王立平.吕民乐.知识溢出的规模经济、范围经济与连结经济.科学经济社会,2005,(4)：39-42
[139]Suedekum J, Blien U. Local economic structure and industry development in Germany,1993-2001. Economics Bulletin,2005,15(17):1-8
[140]Cantner U, Graf H. Cooperation and specialization in German technology regions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics,2004,14(5):543-562
[141]Fritsch M. Slavtchev V. Industry specialization, diversity and the efficiency of regional innovation systems. Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics. Jena Economic Research Papers in Economics,2007, (18):1-27
[142]Van der Panne G, Van Beers C. On the marshall-jacobs controversy:it takes two to tango. Industrial and Corporate Change,2006,15(5):877-890
[143]Nooteboom B, Van Haverbeke W, Duysters G et al. Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy,2007,36(7):1016-1034
[144]Jaffe A B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D:Evidence from firms'patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review,1986, 76(5):984-1001
[145]Autant-Bernard C. The geography of knowledge spillovers and technological proximity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2001,10(4):237-254
[146]Adams J D, Jaffe A B. Bounding the effects of R&D:An investigation using matched establishment-firm data. RAND Journal of Economics,1996,72(4): 700-721
[147]Orlando M J. Measuring spillovers from industrial R&D:On the importance of geographic and technological proximity. RAND Journal of Economics,2004, 35(4):777-786
[148]Ogawa H, Fujita M. Equilibrium land-use patterns in a non-monocentric city. Journal of Regional Science,1980,20(4):455-475
[149]Long N V, Soubeyran A. R&D spillovers and location choice under Cournot rivalry. Pacific Economic Review,1998,3(2):105-119
[150]Duranton G, Puga D. Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies, in: Henderson J V, Thisse J F. (Eds.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics: Cities and Geography, Elsevier/North-Holland, Amsterdam,2004,4:2852-2904
[151]Fujita M, Thisse J F. Economics of agglomeration-cities, industrial location and regional growth. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,2004,267-286
[152]Portes A, Landolt P. The downside of social capital. The American Prospect, 1996,(26):18-21
[153]Uzzi B. The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations. American Sociological Review,1996,61(4): 674-698
[154]Uzzi B. Embeddedness in the making of financial capital:How social relations and network benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review, 1999,64(4):481-505
[155]Belleflamme P, Picard P, Thisse J F. An economic theory of regional clusters. Journal of Urban Economics,2000,48(1):158-184
[156]Soubeyran A, Weber S. District formation and local social capital:A (tacit) co-option approach. Journal of Urban Economics,2002,52(1):65-92
[157]Basevi G, Ottaviano G. The district and the global economy:Exportation versus foreign location. Journal of Regional Science,2002,42(1):107-126
[158]Maskell P, Malmberg A. Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution. Journal of Economic Geography,2007,7(5):603-618
[159]Krugman P. Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy,1991,99(3):483-499
[160]Burt R S. The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behaviour,1990,(22):345-423
[161]张倩难.谈高技术产业创新的基本特征与过程机制.商业时代,2009,(19)：107-108
[162]黎振强,罗能生.积极发展信用服务业.经济日报(理论周刊),2009-09-07
[163]谢卸林.高技术产业的特点Bjkp.gov.cn,2003-08-07
[164]Garnsey E, Smith H L. Proximity and complexity in the emergence of high technology industry:The Oxbridge comparison.Geoforum,1998,29(4):433-450
[165]Bilbao-Ubillos J, Camino-Beldarrain V. Proximity matters? European Union enlargement and relocation of activities:The case of the Spanish automotive industry. Economic Development Quarterly,2008,22(2):149-166
[166]Jansson J. Inside the internet industry:The importance of proximity in accessing knowledge in the agglomeration of internet firms in Stockholm. European planning studies,2008,16(2):211-228
[167]Maskell P. Low-tech competitive advantages and the role of proximity:The Danish wooden furniture industry. European urban and regional studies,1998, 5(2):99-118
[168]Lublinski A. Does geographic proximity matter? Evidence from clustered and non-clustered aeronautic firms in Germany. Regional Studies,2003,37(5): 453-467
[169]Cooke P, Ehret O. Proximity and procurement:A study of agglomeration in the Welsh aerospace industry. European planning studies,2009,17(4):549-569
[170]Heanue K, Jacobson D. Organizational proximity and iInstitutional learning: The evolution of a spatially dispersed network in the Irish furniture industry. International Studies of Management & Organization,2001-2002,31(4):56-72
[171]Klein J L, Tremblay D G, Fontan J M. Local systems and productive networks in the economic conversion:The case of Montreal. Geographie, Economie, Societe, 2003,5(1):59-75
[172]Watson A. Global music city:Knowledge and geographical proximity in London's recorded music industry. Area,2008,40(1):12-23
[173]Vale M, Caldeira J. Proximity and knowledge governance in localized production systems:The footwear industry in the north region of Portugal. European Planning Studies,2007,15(4):531-548
[174]Petruzzelli A M, Albino V, Carbonara N. External knowledge sources and proximity. Journal of Knowledge Management,2009,13(5):301-318
[175]Petrou A, Daskalopoulou I. Innovation and small firms'growth prospects: relational proximity and knowledge dynamics in a low-tech industry. European Planning Studies,2009,17(11):1591-1604
[176]王立平.我国高校R&D知识溢出的实证研究——以高技术产业为例.中国软科学,2005,(12)：54-59
[177]Kesidou E. Knowledge spillovers in high-tech clusters in developing countries. Globelics Academy,2004,(3):59-67
[178]朱美光,韩伯棠,徐春杰等.知识溢出与高新区科技人力资本流动研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2005,(5)：100-104
[179]马歇尔.经济学原理.彭逸林,王威辉,商金艳译.第一版.北京：人民日报出版社,2009,323-356
[180]Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators:a survey. Journal of Economic Literature,1990,28(4):1661-1707
[181]Feldman M P, Florida R. The geographic sources of innovation:Technological infrastructure and product innovation in the United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,1994,84(2):210-229
[182]Liu X H, Buck T. Innovation performance and channels for international technology spillovers:Evidence from Chinese high-tech industries. Research Policy,2007,36(3):355-366
[183]Autant-Bernard C. The geography of knowledge spillovers and technological proximity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology,2001,10(4):237-254
[184]Antonelli C. Technological districts localized spillovers and productivity growth: The Italian evidence on technological externalities in the core region. International Review of Applied Economics,1994,18(1):18-20
[185]Anselin L, Varga A, Acs Z. Local geographic spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics, 1997,42(3):422-448
[186]Zucker L G, Darby M R, Armstrong J. Intellectual capital and the firm:the technology of geographically localized knowledge spillovers. NBER working paper,1994,4946:1-59
[187]Audretsch D B, Feldman M P. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review.1996,86(3):630-640
[188]Jaffe A B. Real effects of academic research. The American Review,1989,79(5): 957-970
[189]陈丹宇.区域创新系统研究的回顾与评述.科技进步与对策,2007,24(8)：207
[190]Cooke P M, Heidenreich, Braczyk H J. Regional innovation system:the role of governance in a globalized word. London/New York:Routledge,2004,(3):1-400
[191]Edquist C. Systems of innovation:perspectives and challenges. In:Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, eds, The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2005,181-208
[192]Asheim B T, Gertler M S. The geography of innovation:regional innovation systems. In:Fagerberg J, Mowery D C, Nelson R R, eds, The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford:Oxford University Press,2005,291-317
[193]Howells J R L. Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic Geography, Urban Studies 2002,39(5-6):871-884
[194]Amin A. Spatialitis of globalisation. Environment and Planning,2002,34(3): 385-399
[195]Mackinnon D, Cumbers A, Chapman K. Learning, innovation and regional development:A critical appraisal of recent debates. Progress in Human Geography,2002,26(3):293-311
[196]Saxenian A. The new Argonauts:regional advantage in a global economy. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press,2006,48-81
[197]Sternberg R. Entrepreneurship in German regions and the policy dimension. In: Audretsch D B, Grimm H, Wessner C W, eds, Local heroes in the global village. Globalization and new entrepreneurship policies, New York:Springer,2005, 113-144
[198]Fritsch M. Enterprise-university co-operation and the role of public research institutions in regional innovation systems. Industry and Innovation,1999,6(1): 69-83
[199]Wong P K, Ho Y P, Autio E. Entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth: evidence from GEM data. Small Business Economics,2005,24(3):335-350
[200]Stel A van, Carree M, Thurik R. The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth. Small Business Economics,2005,24(3):311-321
[201]Fritsch M P, Mueller C. The effects of new business formation on regional development over Time. Regional Studies,2004,38(7):961-975
[202]Rocha H, Sternberg R. Entrepreneurship:The role of clusters; theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence from Germany. Small Business Economics, 2005,24(3):267-292
[203]Toms, Steven. Accounting for entrepreneurship:A knowledge-based view of the firm. Critical Perspectives on Accounting,2006,17(2):336-357
[204]Woiceshyn, J. Value creation in knowledge-based firms:Aligning problems and resources. Academy of Management Perspectives,2008,22(2):85-99
[205]Carroll E, Elsie. The growth of knowledge-based small firms in Monterrey, Mexico. (Cover story). Texas Business Review,2008,1-6
[206]Acs Z J, Plummer L A. Penetrating the'knowledge filter'in regional economies. The Annals of Regional Science,2005,39(3):439-456
[207]Zucker L G, Darby M R, Brewer M B. Intellectual human capital and the birth of the U.S. biotechnology enterprises. American Economic Review,1998,88(1): 290-306
[208]Florida R. The economic geography of talent. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,2002,92(4):741-755
[209]Cooke P. Regional innovation, entrepreneurship and talent systems. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management,2007,7 (2-5):117-139
[210]Ibata-Arens, Kathryn. The Kyoto model of innovation and entrepreneurship: Regional innovation systems and cluster culture. Prometheus,2008,26(1): 89-109
[211]Baronet J, Riverin, Nathaly. The impact of regional innovation systems on the level of corporate entrepreneurship activity. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business,2010,10(3):359-385
[212]Saxenian A. Silicon Valley's new immigrant entrepreneurs. Economic Development Quarterly,2002,16(1):20-32
[213]黎振强,杨勇,罗能生.基于动态博弈的科技型中小企业合作创新行为分析.上海经济研究,2008,(6)：101-106
[214]黎振强,罗能生.建立健全社会信用体系.经济日报(理论与实践),2009-04-06
[215]拜瑞·J·内勒夫,亚当·M·布兰登勃格.合作竞争.王煜昆,王煜全译.合肥：安徽人民出版社,2000,2-3
[216]王缉慈.地方产业群战略.中国工业经济,2002,(3)：47-54
[217]王缉慈.关于发展创新型产业集群的政策建议.经济地理,2004,(4)：433-436
[218]周其仁.市场里的企业：一个人力资本与非人力资本的特别合约.经济研究,1996,(7)：71-79
[219]王丽敏,肖昆,项晶.企业家精神理论的演化与新进展.经济师,2010,(7)：25
[220]吴敬琏.制度重于技术——论发展我国高新技术产业.经济社会体制比较,1999,(5)：1-6
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |