基于市场结构分析的中国电影产业发展研究
|
摘要
中国电影产业体制改革推动了中国电影产业的快速发展。目前,中国电影产量位居世界前三位,影院银幕数量居于世界前列,中国国产电影票房收入也已连续几年超过进口分账大片。但是,与美国等电影大国相比,中国电影产业还存在产业规模小、电影企业竞争力弱、电影创新能力弱等诸多问题。导致中国电影产业出现这些问题的因素有很多,本文主要从中国电影产业体制改革所带来的市场结构变化角度,运用西方产业经济理论中有关市场结构的基本理论,研究电影市场结构对电影企业技术创新、非主旋律电影和主旋律电影生产绩效的影响。从基本的逻辑结构来看,本文研究内容可分为三大部分。第一部分为电影产业市场结构的基本理论,第二部分对中国电影市场结构现状,以及中国电影市场结构对电影技术创新、中国非旋律电影和主旋律电影内容生产绩效的影响进行实证研究,第三部分在实证研究的基础上,提出中国电影产业政策的基本思路和建议。
电影产品是一种内容产品,也是一种信息产品,因而大多数国家将电影产业归入文化产业或内容产业等新兴产业之中。这是因为电影是一种特殊产品,它同时具有经济属性、艺术属性和意识形态属性。社会主义的中国作为一个发展中国家,目前面临外国强大的文化输入,尤其要注意协调好电影产品三种属性之间的关系。为此,本文在分析电影市场结构对电影技术创新影响的同时,将电影分为主旋律电影和非主旋律电影,并分别探讨电影市场结构对两种类型电影内容生产的影响。
电影产品是一种文化产品,具有信息资源的生产特征,电影生产并不完全受自然资源稀缺性的制约,同时电影也是一种版权产品,具有边际成本极低,平均成本递减的特征。根据竞争性垄断市场结构的构成条件,电影产业市场结构更适合形成一种竞争性垄断市场结构。但是,本文通过历史研究方法和量化实证研究方法得出结论认为,中国电影市场结构还不是一种真正的竞争性垄断型,而只是准竞争性垄断市场结构。其主要原因是当前中国电影市场还存在一定的行政壁垒和垄断行为,电影创新还不是市场竞争的核心。在中国电影的准竞争性市场结构内,电影制片业的产量集中度与票房收入集中度产生背离,中国发行公司和院线公司市场集中度较高,但影院市场集中度较低；中影等少数几家大型电影制片企业和院线公司略显规模经济效应,但中国发行公司和影院的规模经济效应并不明显；中国电影产品的差异性增强,但也还存在新的类型影片发展缓慢、同种类型影片的内容题材和创作形式同质化现象严重、主旋律电影的类型化发展受到制约等一些问题；中国电影市场壁垒正在逐步降低,电影发行和院线市场的进入壁垒还较高,内容审查和电影评价成本过高导致中国电影市场壁垒还在一定程度上阻碍竞争的发展。
本文认为中国电影产量的市场集中度指标与电影产业技术创新并不存在正向关系,而呈反向关系,结论并不支持市场集中度越高,企业技术创新效率越高的观点。但是,从电影票房收入集中度来看,本文的结论又支持市场集中度与企业技术创新呈正相关的观点。从表面上来看,这两者似乎存在矛盾,但实际上正好反映当前我国电影市场结构与技术创新的现状。因为当前中国电影市场还存在局部的过度竞争,而大规模电影集团又基本控制了中国数字电影技术,许多小型电影制作公司制作的数字电影很难进入影院。不难看出,过低的市场集中度所表现出来的过度竞争,对中国电影技术创新的长期发展会带来一定的负面影响。从电影企业规模来看,无论是在电影企业技术过程创新还是产品创新,大规模电影企业都占绝对优势,中小规模电影企业总体创新能力较弱。根据市场壁垒降低给电影市场所带来的变化,本文的结论认为无论从电影制片业数量的变化、影院数量的变化,还是从进口影片数量的变化角度来分析,电影市场壁垒的降低都有利于电影产业的技术创新。
在有关电影市场结构对非主旋律电影内容生产带来影响的研究中,本文用历史研究工作方法分析认为,由于政府过多的行政力量存在,过高和过低的电影制片业市场集中度都不利于非主旋律电影创新。从电影企业规模角度来看,电影企业的规模大小与非主旋律电影内容生产效率存在一定的正相关性,并支持经济学理论关于大规模企业规模经济效应和生产效率相应较大的观点。本文结论也认为,市场壁垒的降低有利于民营资本和境外资本的进入,不仅不会产生“替代效应”和“挤出效应”,而且会对中国非主旋律电影的发展起重要的推动作用,研究结论支持市场壁垒降低、民营资本和境外资本进入有利于中国非主旋律电影内容生产的观点。
2003年以前的中国电影制片业集中度较高,但不足以说明其对中国主旋律电影产生正面影响,因为这只是中国电影体制改革初期和过渡期的一种特殊现象,主旋律电影的迅速发展主要受益于政府的扶持行为；而2003年以后,随着电影制片业市场集中度快速下降,主旋律电影市场并没有产生良性竞争,反而出现过度竞争,并逐渐成为中国主旋律电影发展的障碍。本文结论认为大规模电影企业与中小型电影企业对中国主旋律电影内容生产起相同的作用,大规模电影企业的资金实力、抗风险能力和品牌效应有利于主旋律电影生产,而主旋律电影的多样化和创新又需要更多的中小型电影企业的参与。中国电影市场壁垒的降低,促进了中国主旋律电影生产主体的多元化,更多的民营资本和境外资本进入中国电影制片市场,对中国主旋律电影生产起重要的推动作用。
根据以上研究结论,本文最后简要分析了外国主要电影国家的电影产业政策,提出中国电影产业政策调整要立足于维护本国利益和民族利益,根据后发国家的实际情况,以优化电影市场结构为目的,并符合国际惯例。首先,要进一步降低电影市场壁垒,但要制定相应政策来抑制过度竞争；其次,要在支持电影企业规模化发展的同时,制定具体的措施扶持创新型中小型电影企业的发展；再次,要制定相应的电影反垄断政策,规范电影市场竞争秩序；最后,建议将电影审查制度纳入到电影产业政策体系,制定适度的主旋律电影扶持性产业政策。
The reform of system in Chinese film industry has greatly speeded the development of itself. Now, the output of Chinese film is top3in the world and the number of screens is also in the top class, besides, the domestic box office income has exceeded that of import films recent years. However, comparing with some big film-producing countries like America, Chinese film industry is now facing many problems like weak in size, competitive power and creativity which are caused by many factors. Under the basis of western industrial economy theories about market structure, this article will have a research on the influence of film market structure to the innovation of film enterprise technology and the production performance of theme and non-theme film from the perspective of the changes on market structure caused by system reform of Chinese film industry. The research has three parts logically. The first part is about some basic theories of film industry market and film innovation. An empirical study on current Chinese film market situation, influence of Chinese film market structure to the innovation of film technology and the production performance of theme and non-theme film will be taken in the second part. The last part will raise some thoughts and suggestions of Chinese film industrial policy under the basis of the empirical study.
Film product is a kind of content product, as well as a kind of information product. Therefore, most countries have classified film industry into new emergent industry like cultural industry and content industry. Due to its specialty, film has economy nature, art nature and ideology nature at the same time. China, as a developing socialism country, is facing a large foreign culture input, it is important to have good coordination of the three natures. So apart from the analysis of influence of Chinese film market structure to the innovation of film technology, this article will classify film into theme film and non-theme one and inquire into the influence of film market structure to them individually.
Film product is a kind of cultural product which has the production character of information resource. Film production is not totally bonded by the limitation of natural resource; meanwhile, film is a kind of copyright product, which has the character of extremely low marginal cost and decreasing average cost. Film industry market should be a competitive monopoly market according to its consisting factors. However, with history method and quantization empirical research method, this article draw a conclusion that Chinese film market structure is not the kind of competitive monopoly market yet, but just a pre-competitive monopoly market. This is mainly because current Chinese film market still has certain administrative barriers and monopoly behavior and the core of market competition do not lie in film innovation. In the pre-competitive monopoly market structure of Chinese film, the concentration degree of production output deviates from that of the box office income. Though a few film production tycoons like China Film Corporation show certain scales, scale economy effect of most issuing companies and theaters is not obvious. Chinese film products show more diversity, but problems still come out:new type film develops slowly; same type film tends to repeat in content and style; theme films development is restricted in mold. Chinese film market barriers gradually turn lower, but the entry of issuing and theater market is still in a certain height. The market barrier that is caused by the high cost of content review and film commenting hinder the development of competition in some way.
This article suggests that market concentration degree term of Chinese film output does not have positive relationship with film industry technology innovation, but shows negative relationship. The conclusion does not support the opinion that the higher the market concentration degree is, the higher the efficiency of enterprise technology innovation will be. However, from the view of the booking office income concentration degree of film, the conclusion supports the positive relationship between film industry technology innovation and market concentration degree. On the surface, it seems to be a contradiction, but actually, it reflects the current situation of Chinese film market structure and technology innovation. Chinese film market has some partial excessive competition and the large scale film corporations handle the core digital film technology, which makes it difficult for many little companies' product enter into theater. It is obvious that low market concentration degree leads to excessive competition and this will make certain side effect on the long term development of Chinese film technology innovation. From the perspective of enterprise scale, large scale film enterprises have overwhelming superiority no matter in technology innovation or products innovation and small and medium scale companies overall are weak in creativity ability. According to the research of changes in film market that are taken by the decrease of market barrier, the conclusion of the article supports that the decrease of market barrier will benefit to the technology innovation of film industry no matter analyzing from the perspective of changes in the number of film and theater or changes in the number of import film.
In the research of influence of film market to non-theme film, with history research method, this article holds the opinion that due to much administrative strength, too high or too low film production market concentration degree both are not favorable to innovation of non-theme film. From the perspective of film enterprise scale, the scale has certain positive relationship with non-theme film production. The article also supports the opinion in economic theories that scale economy effect of large enterprise results in large production efficiency. The conclusion shows that the decrease of market barrier will attract more private and oversea capital and this will not produce "replacing effect" or "extrusion effect", on the contrary, it can give an impetus to the development of Chinese non-theme film. The conclusion supports that the decrease of market barrier and the entry of private and oversea capital will be advantageous to Chinese non-theme film production.
Chinese film production has a high concentration degree before2003, but this cannot prove its positive influence to Chinese theme film because it is a special phenomenon in the initial period of Chinese film system reform and the fast development of Chinese theme film is attributed by the support of government. After2003, concentration degree decreased very in a large extent, benign competition did not come out, while excessive competition is produced and it gradually became the main obstacle of the development of Chinese theme film. The conclusion of this article supports that large scale film enterprise and medium and small film company play the same effect to Chinese theme film. The strong strength in finance, risk assisting and brand effect of large scale enterprise benefits to the production of theme film. The diversity and creation of theme film also need to the participation of medium and small film company. The decrease of Chinese film market barrier can promote the diversity of the main creation body of Chinese theme film, attract more private and oversea capital coming into Chinese film production market and push the development of Chinese theme film production.
According to the above research, this article has a brief analysis of the industrial policy of main foreign film countries and suggests that the adjustment of Chinese film industry policy should base on protecting the benefit of the country and nation, conduct under the purpose of optimizing film market structure and conform to international rule. Firstly, film market barrier should be lower in advance; besides, related policy to prevent excessive competition should be carried out. Secondly, the support to the scale enlarging of film enterprise is needed, at the same time; measures should be taken out to assist the development of medium and small company of innovation type. Thirdly, anti-monopoly policy of film should be set up to standardize the order of film market competition. Lastly, the article suggests that film review system can be brought into film industry policy system and proper assisting policies to theme film are also necessary.
电影产品是一种内容产品,也是一种信息产品,因而大多数国家将电影产业归入文化产业或内容产业等新兴产业之中。这是因为电影是一种特殊产品,它同时具有经济属性、艺术属性和意识形态属性。社会主义的中国作为一个发展中国家,目前面临外国强大的文化输入,尤其要注意协调好电影产品三种属性之间的关系。为此,本文在分析电影市场结构对电影技术创新影响的同时,将电影分为主旋律电影和非主旋律电影,并分别探讨电影市场结构对两种类型电影内容生产的影响。
电影产品是一种文化产品,具有信息资源的生产特征,电影生产并不完全受自然资源稀缺性的制约,同时电影也是一种版权产品,具有边际成本极低,平均成本递减的特征。根据竞争性垄断市场结构的构成条件,电影产业市场结构更适合形成一种竞争性垄断市场结构。但是,本文通过历史研究方法和量化实证研究方法得出结论认为,中国电影市场结构还不是一种真正的竞争性垄断型,而只是准竞争性垄断市场结构。其主要原因是当前中国电影市场还存在一定的行政壁垒和垄断行为,电影创新还不是市场竞争的核心。在中国电影的准竞争性市场结构内,电影制片业的产量集中度与票房收入集中度产生背离,中国发行公司和院线公司市场集中度较高,但影院市场集中度较低；中影等少数几家大型电影制片企业和院线公司略显规模经济效应,但中国发行公司和影院的规模经济效应并不明显；中国电影产品的差异性增强,但也还存在新的类型影片发展缓慢、同种类型影片的内容题材和创作形式同质化现象严重、主旋律电影的类型化发展受到制约等一些问题；中国电影市场壁垒正在逐步降低,电影发行和院线市场的进入壁垒还较高,内容审查和电影评价成本过高导致中国电影市场壁垒还在一定程度上阻碍竞争的发展。
本文认为中国电影产量的市场集中度指标与电影产业技术创新并不存在正向关系,而呈反向关系,结论并不支持市场集中度越高,企业技术创新效率越高的观点。但是,从电影票房收入集中度来看,本文的结论又支持市场集中度与企业技术创新呈正相关的观点。从表面上来看,这两者似乎存在矛盾,但实际上正好反映当前我国电影市场结构与技术创新的现状。因为当前中国电影市场还存在局部的过度竞争,而大规模电影集团又基本控制了中国数字电影技术,许多小型电影制作公司制作的数字电影很难进入影院。不难看出,过低的市场集中度所表现出来的过度竞争,对中国电影技术创新的长期发展会带来一定的负面影响。从电影企业规模来看,无论是在电影企业技术过程创新还是产品创新,大规模电影企业都占绝对优势,中小规模电影企业总体创新能力较弱。根据市场壁垒降低给电影市场所带来的变化,本文的结论认为无论从电影制片业数量的变化、影院数量的变化,还是从进口影片数量的变化角度来分析,电影市场壁垒的降低都有利于电影产业的技术创新。
在有关电影市场结构对非主旋律电影内容生产带来影响的研究中,本文用历史研究工作方法分析认为,由于政府过多的行政力量存在,过高和过低的电影制片业市场集中度都不利于非主旋律电影创新。从电影企业规模角度来看,电影企业的规模大小与非主旋律电影内容生产效率存在一定的正相关性,并支持经济学理论关于大规模企业规模经济效应和生产效率相应较大的观点。本文结论也认为,市场壁垒的降低有利于民营资本和境外资本的进入,不仅不会产生“替代效应”和“挤出效应”,而且会对中国非主旋律电影的发展起重要的推动作用,研究结论支持市场壁垒降低、民营资本和境外资本进入有利于中国非主旋律电影内容生产的观点。
2003年以前的中国电影制片业集中度较高,但不足以说明其对中国主旋律电影产生正面影响,因为这只是中国电影体制改革初期和过渡期的一种特殊现象,主旋律电影的迅速发展主要受益于政府的扶持行为；而2003年以后,随着电影制片业市场集中度快速下降,主旋律电影市场并没有产生良性竞争,反而出现过度竞争,并逐渐成为中国主旋律电影发展的障碍。本文结论认为大规模电影企业与中小型电影企业对中国主旋律电影内容生产起相同的作用,大规模电影企业的资金实力、抗风险能力和品牌效应有利于主旋律电影生产,而主旋律电影的多样化和创新又需要更多的中小型电影企业的参与。中国电影市场壁垒的降低,促进了中国主旋律电影生产主体的多元化,更多的民营资本和境外资本进入中国电影制片市场,对中国主旋律电影生产起重要的推动作用。
根据以上研究结论,本文最后简要分析了外国主要电影国家的电影产业政策,提出中国电影产业政策调整要立足于维护本国利益和民族利益,根据后发国家的实际情况,以优化电影市场结构为目的,并符合国际惯例。首先,要进一步降低电影市场壁垒,但要制定相应政策来抑制过度竞争；其次,要在支持电影企业规模化发展的同时,制定具体的措施扶持创新型中小型电影企业的发展；再次,要制定相应的电影反垄断政策,规范电影市场竞争秩序；最后,建议将电影审查制度纳入到电影产业政策体系,制定适度的主旋律电影扶持性产业政策。
The reform of system in Chinese film industry has greatly speeded the development of itself. Now, the output of Chinese film is top3in the world and the number of screens is also in the top class, besides, the domestic box office income has exceeded that of import films recent years. However, comparing with some big film-producing countries like America, Chinese film industry is now facing many problems like weak in size, competitive power and creativity which are caused by many factors. Under the basis of western industrial economy theories about market structure, this article will have a research on the influence of film market structure to the innovation of film enterprise technology and the production performance of theme and non-theme film from the perspective of the changes on market structure caused by system reform of Chinese film industry. The research has three parts logically. The first part is about some basic theories of film industry market and film innovation. An empirical study on current Chinese film market situation, influence of Chinese film market structure to the innovation of film technology and the production performance of theme and non-theme film will be taken in the second part. The last part will raise some thoughts and suggestions of Chinese film industrial policy under the basis of the empirical study.
Film product is a kind of content product, as well as a kind of information product. Therefore, most countries have classified film industry into new emergent industry like cultural industry and content industry. Due to its specialty, film has economy nature, art nature and ideology nature at the same time. China, as a developing socialism country, is facing a large foreign culture input, it is important to have good coordination of the three natures. So apart from the analysis of influence of Chinese film market structure to the innovation of film technology, this article will classify film into theme film and non-theme one and inquire into the influence of film market structure to them individually.
Film product is a kind of cultural product which has the production character of information resource. Film production is not totally bonded by the limitation of natural resource; meanwhile, film is a kind of copyright product, which has the character of extremely low marginal cost and decreasing average cost. Film industry market should be a competitive monopoly market according to its consisting factors. However, with history method and quantization empirical research method, this article draw a conclusion that Chinese film market structure is not the kind of competitive monopoly market yet, but just a pre-competitive monopoly market. This is mainly because current Chinese film market still has certain administrative barriers and monopoly behavior and the core of market competition do not lie in film innovation. In the pre-competitive monopoly market structure of Chinese film, the concentration degree of production output deviates from that of the box office income. Though a few film production tycoons like China Film Corporation show certain scales, scale economy effect of most issuing companies and theaters is not obvious. Chinese film products show more diversity, but problems still come out:new type film develops slowly; same type film tends to repeat in content and style; theme films development is restricted in mold. Chinese film market barriers gradually turn lower, but the entry of issuing and theater market is still in a certain height. The market barrier that is caused by the high cost of content review and film commenting hinder the development of competition in some way.
This article suggests that market concentration degree term of Chinese film output does not have positive relationship with film industry technology innovation, but shows negative relationship. The conclusion does not support the opinion that the higher the market concentration degree is, the higher the efficiency of enterprise technology innovation will be. However, from the view of the booking office income concentration degree of film, the conclusion supports the positive relationship between film industry technology innovation and market concentration degree. On the surface, it seems to be a contradiction, but actually, it reflects the current situation of Chinese film market structure and technology innovation. Chinese film market has some partial excessive competition and the large scale film corporations handle the core digital film technology, which makes it difficult for many little companies' product enter into theater. It is obvious that low market concentration degree leads to excessive competition and this will make certain side effect on the long term development of Chinese film technology innovation. From the perspective of enterprise scale, large scale film enterprises have overwhelming superiority no matter in technology innovation or products innovation and small and medium scale companies overall are weak in creativity ability. According to the research of changes in film market that are taken by the decrease of market barrier, the conclusion of the article supports that the decrease of market barrier will benefit to the technology innovation of film industry no matter analyzing from the perspective of changes in the number of film and theater or changes in the number of import film.
In the research of influence of film market to non-theme film, with history research method, this article holds the opinion that due to much administrative strength, too high or too low film production market concentration degree both are not favorable to innovation of non-theme film. From the perspective of film enterprise scale, the scale has certain positive relationship with non-theme film production. The article also supports the opinion in economic theories that scale economy effect of large enterprise results in large production efficiency. The conclusion shows that the decrease of market barrier will attract more private and oversea capital and this will not produce "replacing effect" or "extrusion effect", on the contrary, it can give an impetus to the development of Chinese non-theme film. The conclusion supports that the decrease of market barrier and the entry of private and oversea capital will be advantageous to Chinese non-theme film production.
Chinese film production has a high concentration degree before2003, but this cannot prove its positive influence to Chinese theme film because it is a special phenomenon in the initial period of Chinese film system reform and the fast development of Chinese theme film is attributed by the support of government. After2003, concentration degree decreased very in a large extent, benign competition did not come out, while excessive competition is produced and it gradually became the main obstacle of the development of Chinese theme film. The conclusion of this article supports that large scale film enterprise and medium and small film company play the same effect to Chinese theme film. The strong strength in finance, risk assisting and brand effect of large scale enterprise benefits to the production of theme film. The diversity and creation of theme film also need to the participation of medium and small film company. The decrease of Chinese film market barrier can promote the diversity of the main creation body of Chinese theme film, attract more private and oversea capital coming into Chinese film production market and push the development of Chinese theme film production.
According to the above research, this article has a brief analysis of the industrial policy of main foreign film countries and suggests that the adjustment of Chinese film industry policy should base on protecting the benefit of the country and nation, conduct under the purpose of optimizing film market structure and conform to international rule. Firstly, film market barrier should be lower in advance; besides, related policy to prevent excessive competition should be carried out. Secondly, the support to the scale enlarging of film enterprise is needed, at the same time; measures should be taken out to assist the development of medium and small company of innovation type. Thirdly, anti-monopoly policy of film should be set up to standardize the order of film market competition. Lastly, the article suggests that film review system can be brought into film industry policy system and proper assisting policies to theme film are also necessary.
引文
①参阅国务院办公厅国办发[2010]9号文件。
②参阅《关于改革电影发行放映机制的实施细则(试行)》
[1]Nelson, Winter. The Schumpeter Tradeoff Revisited. The American Economics Review,1982,72 (1):114-131
[2]冯素,后小仙.当代产业组织理论研究综述.经济纵横,2007,(7):84-87
[3]马建堂.市场结构与企业行为——现代产业组织理论研究述评.南京社会科学,1992,(3)：37-41
[4]梁小民.划分市场结构的三个标准.中国经济时报,2004-7-12
[5]R. Nelson, ed. The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton University Ptrss,Princeton,1962,609-626
[6]胡炳志,王兵.市场结构有效性理论述评.经济评论,2002,(4):107-111
[7]海.M.莫瑞斯.产业经济学与组织.北京：经济科学出版社,2001,461
[8]刘红英,张明.市场结构与经济效率的研究.财政研究,2007,(8):35-37
[9]H.Demsetz.Information and Efficiency:Another Viewpoint.Journal of Law and Economics,1969,(12)
[10]方福前.西方产业组织理论关于市场结构与创新关系的争论.教学与研究,2002,(11)：57-62
[11]李伟.基于熊彼特假说的技术创新与市场结构关系研究述评.科学·经济·社会,2007,(4)：87-95
[12]熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义与民主.北京：商务印书馆,1999,150-178
[13]Nelson,Winter.The Schumpeter Tradeoff Revisited.The American Economics Review,1982,72(1):114-131
[14]Arrow.Economic Welfare and the A location of Resources for Inventions. R.R.Nelson,ed.The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton University Press,Princeton,1962,609-626
[15]Tushman, Anderson. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments.Administrative Science Quarterly,1986,(30):439-465
[16]Sang-Seung Yi.Market Structure and incentives to innovate:the case of Cournot oligopoly.Economics Letters,1999,65:379-388
[17]Shane Greensterin.Market Structure and Innovation:A Brief Synopsis of Recent Thinking,2002,2,20
[18]F.M.Scherer.Innovation and Growth.Cambridge Mass:The MIT Press, 1984:83-119
[19]Abraham L.Wickelgren.Innovation,market structure and the holdup problem: inverstment incentives and coordination.International Journal of Industrial Organization,2004,(22):693-713
[20]Timothy,K.C.Technological opportunity and the relationship between innovation output and market strumcture.Managerial and Decision Economics,2005,(26): 210-220
[21]Kumar,Nagesh.Technology Imports and Local Research and Development in Indian Manufacturing.The Developing Economics.1987,(25):220-233
[22]Holly J.Raider.Market Structure and Innovation.Social Science Research, 1998,(27):1-21
[23]盛锁,杨建君,刘刃.市场结构与技术创新理论研究综述.科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(4)：92-97
[24]马静玉.对在技术创新与市场结构关系上几个问题的再明晰.技术经济,1996,(2)
[25]杜伟,康自平.激励企业创新的市场环境培育探析.广西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,(1)
[26]赵玉林,朱晓海.市场结构对企业技术创新的影响分析——基于可竞争市场理论的视角.武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4):507-510
[27]刘国新,万君康.市场结构对技术创新的影响分析.管理工程学报,1997,(6)
[28]骆品亮.市场结构内生的具有溢出效应的R＆D竞争模型.系统工程学报,1998,(3)
[29]戚聿东.我国产业集中度与经济绩效关系的实证分析.首都经济贸易大学学报,1999,(2)：64-69
[30]陈羽,李小平,白澎.市场结构如何影响R&D投入——基于中国制造业行业面板数据的实证分析.南开经济研究,2007,(1):135-143
[31]王传荣,徐银良.市场结构与技术创新行为关系的实证研究——基于面板数据回归分析.见：2010年中国产业组织前沿论坛会议论文集.2010,369-377
[32]严海宁.市场结构及其影响因素对中国企业技术创新的作用研究：[华中科技大学博士论文].武汉：华中科技大学,2009,11
[33]车维汉,张琳.市场结构、政府行为与技术创新关系研究.中国社会科学院研究生院学报,2010,(1):66-71
[34]周绍东.中国工业企业技术创新与行政性进入退出壁垒.内蒙古社会科学(汉文版),2008,(7):78-81
[35]David P. T. Young. Modeling Media Markets:How important is Market Structure?.The Journal of Media Economics,2000,13(1):27-44
[36]Albarran,A.B.Media economics:Unerstanding markets,industries,and concepts. Ames:Iowa State University Press,1996
[37]Bagdikian,B.H.The media momopoly.Boston:Beacon Press,1992
[38]巴里·利特曼(Barry R.Litman).大电影产业.北京：清华大学出版社,2005,36-38
[39]Thomas Guback,"The Theatrial Film,"in Benjamin Compaine,Who Owns the Media:Concentration of Ownership in the Mass Communications Industry,2nd edition,White Plains,NY:Knowledge Industries,1982,Chapter 5
[40]Thumas Guback.The Evolution of the Motion Picture Theater Busines in the 1980s.Journal of Communications,1987(3):60-77
[41]Josepth Dominick.Film Economics and Film Content:1964-1983,in Bruce H.Austin,Chapter 9
[42]Barry R. Litman and Linda Kohl.Predicting Financial Success of Motion Pictures: The 80s Experience. Journal of Media Economics,Fall 1989
[43]罗伯特·C·艾伦,道格拉斯·戈梅里.电影史：理论与实践.李迅译.北京：中国电影出版社,1997,180-190
[44]赵卫防.绩效作用下的香港电影产业结构流变及启示.北京电影学院学报,2008,(4)：19-23
[45]高铖.中国大陆电影产业的市场结构：集中度分析.北京电影学院学报,2007,(2)：103-106
[46]陈共德.中国电影市场结构研究.现代传播.2010,(2):93-98
[47]理查德·E,凯夫斯.创意产业经济学.北京：新华出版社,2004,(5):5-11
[48]OECD, Content As a New Industry, DsIl/ICCP/IE(96) 6/FINAL,1998
[49]李晓玲,李会明.内容产业的产生及其影响.现代国际关系,2003,(5):54
[50]赖茂生等.内容产业的含义和分类研究.数字图书馆论坛,2006,(2):12
[51]陈锋.扫描：世界各国文化产业的内涵和政策取向.http://cn.chinagate.cn
[52]参阅国家统计局关于印发《文化及相关产业分类》的通知(国统字[2004]24号)
[53]各国文化创意产业发展简介.http://www.tjfdi.gov.cn
[54]安澜·B.艾尔布兰(Alan B.Albarran)陈鹏译.传媒经济学：市场、产业与观念.北京：中国传媒大学出版社,2009,(3):129
[55]考林·霍斯金斯,斯图亚特·迈克法蒂那,亚当·费恩,刘丰海,张慧宇译.全球电视和电影：产业经济学导论.北京：新华出版社,2004,(1):9-40
[56]刘藩.电影产业经济学.北京：文化艺术出版社,2010,(9):15
[57]张凌云.类型化：在政治和商业之间——中国主旋律电影叙事研究.当代电影,2005,(3)：83-85
[58]斯蒂格利茨.经济学(姚开建、刘凤良、吴汉洪等译).北京：中国人民大学出版社,1997,(5):337-338
[59]朱彤.可竞争市场理论述评.教学与研究,2000,(11):59-61
[60]Baumol,William J.,Panzar,John C.and Willing,Robert D.Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure.San Diego:Harcourt Brance Jovanovich, 1988
[61]李怀,高良谋.新经济的冲击与竞争性垄断市场结构的出现——观察微软案例的一个理论框架.经济研究,2001,10
[62]闫星宇.可竞争市场理论综述.产业经济研究,2009,(1):68
[63]李枢平.电影数字技术的发展及对电影产业的影响——在第三届中国(深圳)国际文化产业博览会数字电影发展论坛上的发言摘要.现代电影技术,2007,(6)：13
[64]朱卫平,孙有平.新经济下竞争性垄断市场的新古典主义探析.暨南学报(人文科学与社会科学版),2004,(5):4
[65]Thomas Simonet,Conglomerate and Content Remakes,Sequals and Series in the New Hollywood,in Bruce A.Austin,Current Research in Film:Audiences, Economics and Law,Volume 3,Norwood,NJ:Ables,1987,Chaper 10
[66]巴里·利特曼(Barry R.Litman).大电影产业.北京：清华大学出版社,2005,(4):36-38
[67]唐榕.中国电影改革脉络及发展状况——中国电影化问题系列思考之二.中国电影市场[J],2006,(6):8
[68]沈芸.中国电影产业史.北京：中国电影出版社,2005,77
[69]唐榕.30年电影体制改革成效分析。http://www.china.com.cn/
[70]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2009).中国电影出版社,2009,38-54
[71]高铖.基于SCP分析框架的中国大陆电影产业研究论文：[暨南大学博士学位论文].广州：暨南大学,2007,37
[72]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2008).北京：中国电影出版社,2008,71
[73]艺恩咨询公司.2009-2010中国电影产业研究报告http://www.entgroup.cn/
[74]清科研究中心.2010年中国电影产业投资研究报告.www.zero2ipo.com.cn.
[75]崔保国.2011年：中国传媒产业发展报告.社会科学文献出版社,2011,(4):184
[76]高波,于良春.中国银行业规模经济效应分析.经济评论,2003,(1):125
[77]参阅《关于进一步深化电影业改革的若干意见》(320号文),国家广播电影电视总局网站。
[78]刘志彪,石奇.市场结构和公司结构的决定.产业经济研究,2004,(2):70
[79]2004年的《关于加快电影产业发展的若干意见》
[80]参阅2001年国家广电总局颁布的《关于改革电影发行放映机制的实施细则》(试行)
[81]马冉.文化贸易领域欧洲政策法规研究.广西政法管理干部学院学报,2009,85
[82]周文豪.有效竞争：我国产业组织的模式选择.改革与战略.2001,(6)
[83]唐榕.中影集团在整合与创新中强大.中国电影市场,2009,(9):15-17
[84]黄群飞.建立真正的院线推进中国院线制改革——中国电影产业漫谈之一中国电影市场,2005,(10):19
[85]刘达.数字电影技术标准及其战略研究.现代电视技术,2009,(6)：110
[86]国家广播电影电视总局：《数字电影管理暂行规定》第二条。
[87]国家广播电影电视总局发展研究中心.2009年中国广播电影电视发展报告.北京：新华出版社,2009,128
[88]国家广播电影电视总局发展研究中心.2010年中国广播电影电视发展报告.北京：新华出版社,2010,128
[89]艺恩咨询公司.2010-2011年中国电影产业研究报告.http://www.entgroup.cn/reports/f/1810186.shtml。
[90]Scherer,F.M. Maket Structure and the Employment of Scientists and Enineers. America Economic Review.1967,(3):524-531
[91]Hamberg,D.Size of Firm,Oligopoly,and Research:The Evidence.Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science,1964,(30):62-75
[92]Cohen and Levin. Innivation andMarket Structure, In Handbookof Industrial organization. Amsterdam:North-Holland,1989
[93]吴汉洪.西方产业组织理论关于市场结构与创新关系的争论.教学与研究,2002,(11)：61
[94]Nickels,S.Competition and Corporate Performance.Journal of Political Economy,1996,(104):724-726
[95]Williamson, O.E.Innovation and Market Structure.Journal of Political Econom, 1965(73)-67-73
[96]严海宁、邱国峰.市场结构视角下的产品创新和过程创新：国外文献综述.长春工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,(5):33
[97]李静.新时期体制演变中的电影进口研究：[山东大学博士论文].济南：山东大学,2010,60-80
[98]臧剑,阿福.2010年内地公映进口片盘点：百亿之半壁江山.艺恩娱乐产业网,http://news.entgroup.cn
[99]弘石.第一次浪潮——默片期中国商业电影现象述评.当代电影,1995,2
[100]饶曙光.观众本体与中国商业电影之三十年流变.电影艺术,2008,5(6)
[101]袁小平.关于电影体制改革的畅想.北京电影学院学报,1993,(1)
[102]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2011).北京：中国电影出版社,2011,16
[103]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2007).北京：中国电影出版社,2008
[104]尹鸿,王晓丰.“高概念”商业电影模式初探.当代电影,2006,(3):92
[105]喇培康：中国电影合拍片解读.中国电影网,http://news.chinafilm.com
[106]何美.冲突、融合、共赢：内地香港合拍片30年.当代电影,2008,(2):7
[107]陈可辛.合拍是港片唯一出路.中国电影网,http://news.chinafilm.com
[108]2010年中国电影票房过百亿.人民日报,2011-1-8
[109]张恂.香港内地合拍片：合作入佳境、凳合成主流.当代电影,2010,(8):79
[110]黄德佃.试谈电影发展的过渡时期.电影经济,1992,(6)
[111]尹鸿,詹庆生.2006中国电影产业备忘.电影艺术,2007,(2):8
[112]林莉丽.中影集团2010:发挥“龙头作用”推动跨越式发展.中国电影市场,2010,(5)：6-7
[113]周黎明.好莱坞启示录.上海：复旦大学出版社,2010,(1):125
[114]苏丽萍.《集结号》是中国大片的一个转折点.光明日报,2008-1-27-2
[115]Andre Lange,Tim Westcott.Public funding for the film and audiovisual works in Europe-A comparative approach.ropean Audiovisual Observatory,2004
[116]Lucia Bellucci.Notional support for film production in the EU:an analysis of the Commission Decision-Making Practice.European Law Journal,vol.16,No.2, March 2010,PP.211-232
[117]T·曼格德.加拿大电影与录像生产：问题、政策与前景.世界电影,1998,(4):221-234
[118]张玉国.文化产业与政策导论.北京：高等教育出版社,2006,(12):97-102
[119]乔万民.银幕配额制度下的韩国电影.中国文化报,2006-2-24(4)
[120]王海洲,柳宏宇,王珏.20世纪末韩国电影产业发展研究.2009年中国电影年鉴：382-390
②参阅《关于改革电影发行放映机制的实施细则(试行)》
[1]Nelson, Winter. The Schumpeter Tradeoff Revisited. The American Economics Review,1982,72 (1):114-131
[2]冯素,后小仙.当代产业组织理论研究综述.经济纵横,2007,(7):84-87
[3]马建堂.市场结构与企业行为——现代产业组织理论研究述评.南京社会科学,1992,(3)：37-41
[4]梁小民.划分市场结构的三个标准.中国经济时报,2004-7-12
[5]R. Nelson, ed. The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton University Ptrss,Princeton,1962,609-626
[6]胡炳志,王兵.市场结构有效性理论述评.经济评论,2002,(4):107-111
[7]海.M.莫瑞斯.产业经济学与组织.北京：经济科学出版社,2001,461
[8]刘红英,张明.市场结构与经济效率的研究.财政研究,2007,(8):35-37
[9]H.Demsetz.Information and Efficiency:Another Viewpoint.Journal of Law and Economics,1969,(12)
[10]方福前.西方产业组织理论关于市场结构与创新关系的争论.教学与研究,2002,(11)：57-62
[11]李伟.基于熊彼特假说的技术创新与市场结构关系研究述评.科学·经济·社会,2007,(4)：87-95
[12]熊彼特.资本主义、社会主义与民主.北京：商务印书馆,1999,150-178
[13]Nelson,Winter.The Schumpeter Tradeoff Revisited.The American Economics Review,1982,72(1):114-131
[14]Arrow.Economic Welfare and the A location of Resources for Inventions. R.R.Nelson,ed.The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princeton University Press,Princeton,1962,609-626
[15]Tushman, Anderson. Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments.Administrative Science Quarterly,1986,(30):439-465
[16]Sang-Seung Yi.Market Structure and incentives to innovate:the case of Cournot oligopoly.Economics Letters,1999,65:379-388
[17]Shane Greensterin.Market Structure and Innovation:A Brief Synopsis of Recent Thinking,2002,2,20
[18]F.M.Scherer.Innovation and Growth.Cambridge Mass:The MIT Press, 1984:83-119
[19]Abraham L.Wickelgren.Innovation,market structure and the holdup problem: inverstment incentives and coordination.International Journal of Industrial Organization,2004,(22):693-713
[20]Timothy,K.C.Technological opportunity and the relationship between innovation output and market strumcture.Managerial and Decision Economics,2005,(26): 210-220
[21]Kumar,Nagesh.Technology Imports and Local Research and Development in Indian Manufacturing.The Developing Economics.1987,(25):220-233
[22]Holly J.Raider.Market Structure and Innovation.Social Science Research, 1998,(27):1-21
[23]盛锁,杨建君,刘刃.市场结构与技术创新理论研究综述.科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(4)：92-97
[24]马静玉.对在技术创新与市场结构关系上几个问题的再明晰.技术经济,1996,(2)
[25]杜伟,康自平.激励企业创新的市场环境培育探析.广西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2004,(1)
[26]赵玉林,朱晓海.市场结构对企业技术创新的影响分析——基于可竞争市场理论的视角.武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4):507-510
[27]刘国新,万君康.市场结构对技术创新的影响分析.管理工程学报,1997,(6)
[28]骆品亮.市场结构内生的具有溢出效应的R＆D竞争模型.系统工程学报,1998,(3)
[29]戚聿东.我国产业集中度与经济绩效关系的实证分析.首都经济贸易大学学报,1999,(2)：64-69
[30]陈羽,李小平,白澎.市场结构如何影响R&D投入——基于中国制造业行业面板数据的实证分析.南开经济研究,2007,(1):135-143
[31]王传荣,徐银良.市场结构与技术创新行为关系的实证研究——基于面板数据回归分析.见：2010年中国产业组织前沿论坛会议论文集.2010,369-377
[32]严海宁.市场结构及其影响因素对中国企业技术创新的作用研究：[华中科技大学博士论文].武汉：华中科技大学,2009,11
[33]车维汉,张琳.市场结构、政府行为与技术创新关系研究.中国社会科学院研究生院学报,2010,(1):66-71
[34]周绍东.中国工业企业技术创新与行政性进入退出壁垒.内蒙古社会科学(汉文版),2008,(7):78-81
[35]David P. T. Young. Modeling Media Markets:How important is Market Structure?.The Journal of Media Economics,2000,13(1):27-44
[36]Albarran,A.B.Media economics:Unerstanding markets,industries,and concepts. Ames:Iowa State University Press,1996
[37]Bagdikian,B.H.The media momopoly.Boston:Beacon Press,1992
[38]巴里·利特曼(Barry R.Litman).大电影产业.北京：清华大学出版社,2005,36-38
[39]Thomas Guback,"The Theatrial Film,"in Benjamin Compaine,Who Owns the Media:Concentration of Ownership in the Mass Communications Industry,2nd edition,White Plains,NY:Knowledge Industries,1982,Chapter 5
[40]Thumas Guback.The Evolution of the Motion Picture Theater Busines in the 1980s.Journal of Communications,1987(3):60-77
[41]Josepth Dominick.Film Economics and Film Content:1964-1983,in Bruce H.Austin,Chapter 9
[42]Barry R. Litman and Linda Kohl.Predicting Financial Success of Motion Pictures: The 80s Experience. Journal of Media Economics,Fall 1989
[43]罗伯特·C·艾伦,道格拉斯·戈梅里.电影史：理论与实践.李迅译.北京：中国电影出版社,1997,180-190
[44]赵卫防.绩效作用下的香港电影产业结构流变及启示.北京电影学院学报,2008,(4)：19-23
[45]高铖.中国大陆电影产业的市场结构：集中度分析.北京电影学院学报,2007,(2)：103-106
[46]陈共德.中国电影市场结构研究.现代传播.2010,(2):93-98
[47]理查德·E,凯夫斯.创意产业经济学.北京：新华出版社,2004,(5):5-11
[48]OECD, Content As a New Industry, DsIl/ICCP/IE(96) 6/FINAL,1998
[49]李晓玲,李会明.内容产业的产生及其影响.现代国际关系,2003,(5):54
[50]赖茂生等.内容产业的含义和分类研究.数字图书馆论坛,2006,(2):12
[51]陈锋.扫描：世界各国文化产业的内涵和政策取向.http://cn.chinagate.cn
[52]参阅国家统计局关于印发《文化及相关产业分类》的通知(国统字[2004]24号)
[53]各国文化创意产业发展简介.http://www.tjfdi.gov.cn
[54]安澜·B.艾尔布兰(Alan B.Albarran)陈鹏译.传媒经济学：市场、产业与观念.北京：中国传媒大学出版社,2009,(3):129
[55]考林·霍斯金斯,斯图亚特·迈克法蒂那,亚当·费恩,刘丰海,张慧宇译.全球电视和电影：产业经济学导论.北京：新华出版社,2004,(1):9-40
[56]刘藩.电影产业经济学.北京：文化艺术出版社,2010,(9):15
[57]张凌云.类型化：在政治和商业之间——中国主旋律电影叙事研究.当代电影,2005,(3)：83-85
[58]斯蒂格利茨.经济学(姚开建、刘凤良、吴汉洪等译).北京：中国人民大学出版社,1997,(5):337-338
[59]朱彤.可竞争市场理论述评.教学与研究,2000,(11):59-61
[60]Baumol,William J.,Panzar,John C.and Willing,Robert D.Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure.San Diego:Harcourt Brance Jovanovich, 1988
[61]李怀,高良谋.新经济的冲击与竞争性垄断市场结构的出现——观察微软案例的一个理论框架.经济研究,2001,10
[62]闫星宇.可竞争市场理论综述.产业经济研究,2009,(1):68
[63]李枢平.电影数字技术的发展及对电影产业的影响——在第三届中国(深圳)国际文化产业博览会数字电影发展论坛上的发言摘要.现代电影技术,2007,(6)：13
[64]朱卫平,孙有平.新经济下竞争性垄断市场的新古典主义探析.暨南学报(人文科学与社会科学版),2004,(5):4
[65]Thomas Simonet,Conglomerate and Content Remakes,Sequals and Series in the New Hollywood,in Bruce A.Austin,Current Research in Film:Audiences, Economics and Law,Volume 3,Norwood,NJ:Ables,1987,Chaper 10
[66]巴里·利特曼(Barry R.Litman).大电影产业.北京：清华大学出版社,2005,(4):36-38
[67]唐榕.中国电影改革脉络及发展状况——中国电影化问题系列思考之二.中国电影市场[J],2006,(6):8
[68]沈芸.中国电影产业史.北京：中国电影出版社,2005,77
[69]唐榕.30年电影体制改革成效分析。http://www.china.com.cn/
[70]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2009).中国电影出版社,2009,38-54
[71]高铖.基于SCP分析框架的中国大陆电影产业研究论文：[暨南大学博士学位论文].广州：暨南大学,2007,37
[72]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2008).北京：中国电影出版社,2008,71
[73]艺恩咨询公司.2009-2010中国电影产业研究报告http://www.entgroup.cn/
[74]清科研究中心.2010年中国电影产业投资研究报告.www.zero2ipo.com.cn.
[75]崔保国.2011年：中国传媒产业发展报告.社会科学文献出版社,2011,(4):184
[76]高波,于良春.中国银行业规模经济效应分析.经济评论,2003,(1):125
[77]参阅《关于进一步深化电影业改革的若干意见》(320号文),国家广播电影电视总局网站。
[78]刘志彪,石奇.市场结构和公司结构的决定.产业经济研究,2004,(2):70
[79]2004年的《关于加快电影产业发展的若干意见》
[80]参阅2001年国家广电总局颁布的《关于改革电影发行放映机制的实施细则》(试行)
[81]马冉.文化贸易领域欧洲政策法规研究.广西政法管理干部学院学报,2009,85
[82]周文豪.有效竞争：我国产业组织的模式选择.改革与战略.2001,(6)
[83]唐榕.中影集团在整合与创新中强大.中国电影市场,2009,(9):15-17
[84]黄群飞.建立真正的院线推进中国院线制改革——中国电影产业漫谈之一中国电影市场,2005,(10):19
[85]刘达.数字电影技术标准及其战略研究.现代电视技术,2009,(6)：110
[86]国家广播电影电视总局：《数字电影管理暂行规定》第二条。
[87]国家广播电影电视总局发展研究中心.2009年中国广播电影电视发展报告.北京：新华出版社,2009,128
[88]国家广播电影电视总局发展研究中心.2010年中国广播电影电视发展报告.北京：新华出版社,2010,128
[89]艺恩咨询公司.2010-2011年中国电影产业研究报告.http://www.entgroup.cn/reports/f/1810186.shtml。
[90]Scherer,F.M. Maket Structure and the Employment of Scientists and Enineers. America Economic Review.1967,(3):524-531
[91]Hamberg,D.Size of Firm,Oligopoly,and Research:The Evidence.Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science,1964,(30):62-75
[92]Cohen and Levin. Innivation andMarket Structure, In Handbookof Industrial organization. Amsterdam:North-Holland,1989
[93]吴汉洪.西方产业组织理论关于市场结构与创新关系的争论.教学与研究,2002,(11)：61
[94]Nickels,S.Competition and Corporate Performance.Journal of Political Economy,1996,(104):724-726
[95]Williamson, O.E.Innovation and Market Structure.Journal of Political Econom, 1965(73)-67-73
[96]严海宁、邱国峰.市场结构视角下的产品创新和过程创新：国外文献综述.长春工业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,(5):33
[97]李静.新时期体制演变中的电影进口研究：[山东大学博士论文].济南：山东大学,2010,60-80
[98]臧剑,阿福.2010年内地公映进口片盘点：百亿之半壁江山.艺恩娱乐产业网,http://news.entgroup.cn
[99]弘石.第一次浪潮——默片期中国商业电影现象述评.当代电影,1995,2
[100]饶曙光.观众本体与中国商业电影之三十年流变.电影艺术,2008,5(6)
[101]袁小平.关于电影体制改革的畅想.北京电影学院学报,1993,(1)
[102]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2011).北京：中国电影出版社,2011,16
[103]中国电影家协会产业研究中心.中国电影产业研究报告(2007).北京：中国电影出版社,2008
[104]尹鸿,王晓丰.“高概念”商业电影模式初探.当代电影,2006,(3):92
[105]喇培康：中国电影合拍片解读.中国电影网,http://news.chinafilm.com
[106]何美.冲突、融合、共赢：内地香港合拍片30年.当代电影,2008,(2):7
[107]陈可辛.合拍是港片唯一出路.中国电影网,http://news.chinafilm.com
[108]2010年中国电影票房过百亿.人民日报,2011-1-8
[109]张恂.香港内地合拍片：合作入佳境、凳合成主流.当代电影,2010,(8):79
[110]黄德佃.试谈电影发展的过渡时期.电影经济,1992,(6)
[111]尹鸿,詹庆生.2006中国电影产业备忘.电影艺术,2007,(2):8
[112]林莉丽.中影集团2010:发挥“龙头作用”推动跨越式发展.中国电影市场,2010,(5)：6-7
[113]周黎明.好莱坞启示录.上海：复旦大学出版社,2010,(1):125
[114]苏丽萍.《集结号》是中国大片的一个转折点.光明日报,2008-1-27-2
[115]Andre Lange,Tim Westcott.Public funding for the film and audiovisual works in Europe-A comparative approach.ropean Audiovisual Observatory,2004
[116]Lucia Bellucci.Notional support for film production in the EU:an analysis of the Commission Decision-Making Practice.European Law Journal,vol.16,No.2, March 2010,PP.211-232
[117]T·曼格德.加拿大电影与录像生产：问题、政策与前景.世界电影,1998,(4):221-234
[118]张玉国.文化产业与政策导论.北京：高等教育出版社,2006,(12):97-102
[119]乔万民.银幕配额制度下的韩国电影.中国文化报,2006-2-24(4)
[120]王海洲,柳宏宇,王珏.20世纪末韩国电影产业发展研究.2009年中国电影年鉴：382-390