技术创新、制度创新与科技园区发展研究
|
摘要
自主创新能力、高技术产业的发展力是一个国家综合国力的重要体现。科技园区在提升自主创新能力、发展高技术产业方面起着巨大的推动作用。世界各国都将建设科技园区作为发展高技术产业集群、提升自主创新能力的重要手段,研究科技园区发展具有十分重要的战略意义。中国科技园区正在实施“二次创业”战略,战略实践需要以科学理论为指导,研究中国科技园区发展具有十分重要的现实意义。
学者们对科技园区、科技园区的技术创新、科技园区的制度创新进行了研究。但是,对技术创新与科技园区经济发展的关系、制度创新与科技园区经济发展的关系的研究并不多见,从技术创新与制度创新的双重视角对科技园区经济发展进行的研究为数更少。
本文以中国科技园区经济发展问题为中心,在综述已有的关于科技园区技术创新、制度创新研究成果的基础上,从中国科技园区的发展现状出发,借鉴美国科技园区的发展经验,建立了含有制度因素和技术因素的科技园区经济发展分析框架,以技术创新、制度创新为主线,采用微观分析与宏观分析相结合、实证分析与规范分析相结合,并辅之以案例分析的研究方法,着重从技术创新、制度创新、二者的互动关系及其对科技园区发展的影响等方面,探讨了中国科技园区的经济发展问题。
对世界科技园区的发展现状进行的研究表明,世界科技园区的分布存在不平衡性,大部分科技园区位于少数发达的工业化国家,而广大的发展中国家很少。硅谷成功的基本经验是创新,包括制度创新和技术创新。
对中国科技园区的发展现状和经济成效进行的研究表明,中国的科技园区分布不均衡,主要分布在东部沿海地区,西部相对较少。中国的科技园区发展取得了重大成就,但是与发达国家的科技园区相比,差距很大。中国的科技园区要实施“二次创业”,在更高水平上发展,除了借鉴发达国家科技园区的成功经验之外,迫切需要科学的理论作为指导。
对科技园区的创新网络进行的研究表明,科技园区创新网络与产业集群之间存在相互促进的关系。同时,产业集群的形成对科技园区产业结构的相对变化有重要影响。随着科技园区创新网络和产业集群的扩展,产业集群逐渐向创新集群演变。产业集群只有不断创新,向创新集群发展,才能保证企业产品和科技园区产业持久的竞争力。
对科技园区创新集群的形成模式研究表明,产业、大学、政府三螺旋创新是科技园区创新集群形成的重要模式。从大学、企业、政府三元结构创新向大学、企业、政府三螺旋创新转变是科技园区技术创新的战略趋向。从三元结构创新向三螺旋创新转变有赖于科技园区管理机构、科技园区所在的地方政府乃至中央政府推动的科技制度的创新、大学使命的转变和政府运行机制的创新。三螺旋创新有效运行的关键是三元之间要形成互动的网络和良好的运作模式,
对将制度因素加入到经济增长模型的主要方法的研究表明,制度在中国科技园区发展过程中的增长效应,可以用市场化指数、非国有化率、对外开放度等变量作为代理制度变量。实证分析中,非国有经济增长率作为科技园区制度的代理变量更可行。
对高技术企业制度创新的研究表明,高技术企业制度创新的重点是产权制度创新和组织结构创新。高技术企业是以智力资本和人力资本为主要特征的合约,只有使产权的安排、报酬的支付与生产率相一致的高技术企业,才具有持久的发展力和竞争力。对科技园区制度创新内容的研究表明,科技园区制度创新的重点是科技园区立法创新,立法创新的核心是科技园区管理体制的定位问题。对科技园区制度创新模式的研究表明,中国科技园区制度创新正在由自上而下的制度创新向自下而上的制度创新转变、由供给主导型制度创新模式向需求诱导型制度创新模式转变。
对技术创新和制度创新的关系研究表明,技术创新与制度创新在发展高技术产业中何者更重要,要在成本—收益的框架下作出判断。如果技术创新的潜在收益大于制度创新的潜在收益,则技术创新重于制度创新,反之,则制度创新重于技术创新。在转型中国的背景下发展高技术产业和科技园区,制度创新重于技术创新。
对中国科技园区发展的实证研究和经验分析表明,中国科技园区的发展存在非均衡性特征,除了经济发展不平衡的一般规律以及科技园区发展的初始发展条件不同外,主要原因是技术及制度的差异。
本文认为,“创新—经济增长—科技园区发展”是一个有机的统一体,创新是经济增长的原因,又是经济增长的结果;创新与经济增长是制度变迁的原因,也是制度变迁的结果。在经济发展过程中,技术创新和制度创新密不可分、互相促进。创新是科技园区经济发展的动力。科技园区创新的根本目的是促进科技园区经济增长。制度创新、技术创新是决定科技园区经济发展的最主要因素,成功的科技园区一定是实现了技术创新与制度创新的有机结合。技术创新是科技园区发展的源动力,制度创新是科技园区发展的加速器。对处于转型时期的中国而言,应以制度创新为突破口,同时注重进行技术创新,从而推动中国科技园区的相对均衡发展。
The abilities of independent innovations, powers of high-tech industry development are important reflections of a country's comprehensive national strength. Science and Technology Parks(STPs) are playing great roles in improving the abilities of independent innovation and promoting the development of high-tech industries. Building STPs is an important means of developing high-tech industry clusters,enhancing independent innovation capabilities, which are utilized by all countries in the world. Researches on STPs are of great strategic importance.The strategy of "second venture" is being implemented by China's STPs. The guidance of scientific theories are needed by the strategic practices. Researches on China's STPs are of great realistic significance.
It was STPs,technological innovations and institutional innovations that was studied by scholars. However,it was rarely studied on the relationship between technological innovations and economic development of STPs and that of institutional innovations and economic development of STPs. It was less studied on the economic development of STPs from double perspectives of technological innovation and institutional innovation. The focus of this paper is the economic development issues of China's STPs. On the basis of summaries of STPs technological and institutional research results, from the current situation of China's STPs and American experiences, by establishing the STPs analytical framework containing both technological factors and institutional ones, the development of STPs was discussed by focusing on technological innovation, institutional innovation and the interaction between the two, taking technological innovation and institutional innovation as main analytical lines, by the means of combinations of microscopic analysis and macro analysis, empirical analysis and normative analysis,supported by the method of case studies.
The study on the current situation of world's STPs shows that they are of imbalance in distribution, most of the STPs are situated in few advanced industrialized countries, and few ones in developing countries.The basic experiences of Silicon Valley are innovations, including technological innovations and institutional innovations.
The deliberation on the development and economic effectiveness of China's STPs shows that China's STPs are of unequilibrium distributed, mainly located in the eastern coastal regions, western relatively small.China's STPs have made significant achievements, but the gaps are more terriblely larger compared with the STPs in developed countries.Scientific theories are urgently needed to guide China's STPs development at a higher level as the "second venture" is being implemented.
The research on STPs, innovation networks shows that there are mutual promoting relations between STPs innovation networks and industrial clusters.Meanwhile,the formation of industrial clusters has important effects on relative changes of the industrial structures. With the expansion of STPs innovation networks and industrial clusters, industrial clusters will gradually make evolutions to innovational clusters. Only constant innovations and the development of innovational clusters can guarantee the durable competitiveness of enterprises, products and STPs development.
The consideration on the formation models of innovational clusters shows that the triple helix innovation among universities, enterprises and government is an important innovational model which can form innovational clusters in STPs. Strategic trends of technological innovation in STPs will shift from three-element-structure innovation to triple helix innovation. Changes from three-element-structure innovation to triple helix innovation will depend on system innovations of science & technology, transformations of university missions and innovations of government operation mechanism which are promoted by STPs management agencies, local governments and even the central government.Interactive networks and good interactive patterns are the keys to the effective operations of triple helix innovations.
The study on the method of institution factors endogenicalized into the economic growth models shows that marketization index, non-nationalization rate, degree of outside-opening can be used as agentive variables to measure the growth effects during the development of China's STPs. It is more feasible that non-state-owned economic growth rate is used as a agent variable of STPs institutions during empirical analysis。The research on the institutional innovations of high-tech enterprises shows that the innovations of property rights and organizational structure are the main points of enterprises, innovations. High-tech enterprises are contracts mainly characterized by the features of intellectual and human capitals. Only the arrangements of property rights, the payments of remunerations are in lines with productivities in the high-tech enterprises can the enterprises possess enduring power and competitiveness.
The study on the contents of STPs institutional innovations shows that STPs legislation innovation is one of the important innovations, with the management system being the focus.The consideration on the model of STPs institutional innovation shows that the paradigms of STPs institutional innovation are shifting from top-down institutional innovations to bottom-up ones and from supply-oriented institutional innovations to need -induced ones.
The discussion on the relationship between technological innovations and institutional ones expresses that it should be judged under the cost-benefit framework what is more important during the development of high-tech industries.If the potential benefits of technological innovation is greater than that of institutional innovation,then technological innovation is more important than institutional innovation. Conversely, institutional innovation is more important than technological innovation.In the context of restructuring the development of China's high-tech industries and STPs, institutional innovation is more important than technological innovation.
The research on the development situation of China's STPs shows that the economic development of China's STPs possesses unbalanced characteristics, the reasons lie mainly in the differences of technology and institutions among the STPs in addition to the initial different developing conditions and the general laws of unbalanced economic development.
This paper believes that "innovation-economic growth-STPs development " is an organic entity. Innovation is the reason for economic growth, also the result of economic growth. Innovation and economic growth are the reasons for institutional changes, also the results of institutional changes. In the course of economic development, technological and institutional innovations are inseparable, and promoting each other. Technological innovation is the driving force of economic development of STPs.The fundamental purpose of STPs innovations is to promote economic growth in STPs.Institutional innovation and technological innovation are the two most important factors which determine the economic development of STPs. Successful STPs are surely to reach the combination of institutional innovation and technological innovation.Technical innovation is the dynamic source of STPs economic development,and institutional innovation is the accelerator of STPs economic development.With regard to the transition period of China,institutional innovation should be taken as a breach, simultaneously technological innovation should be attached importance on, thus the relatively balanced development of China's STPs will be realized.
学者们对科技园区、科技园区的技术创新、科技园区的制度创新进行了研究。但是,对技术创新与科技园区经济发展的关系、制度创新与科技园区经济发展的关系的研究并不多见,从技术创新与制度创新的双重视角对科技园区经济发展进行的研究为数更少。
本文以中国科技园区经济发展问题为中心,在综述已有的关于科技园区技术创新、制度创新研究成果的基础上,从中国科技园区的发展现状出发,借鉴美国科技园区的发展经验,建立了含有制度因素和技术因素的科技园区经济发展分析框架,以技术创新、制度创新为主线,采用微观分析与宏观分析相结合、实证分析与规范分析相结合,并辅之以案例分析的研究方法,着重从技术创新、制度创新、二者的互动关系及其对科技园区发展的影响等方面,探讨了中国科技园区的经济发展问题。
对世界科技园区的发展现状进行的研究表明,世界科技园区的分布存在不平衡性,大部分科技园区位于少数发达的工业化国家,而广大的发展中国家很少。硅谷成功的基本经验是创新,包括制度创新和技术创新。
对中国科技园区的发展现状和经济成效进行的研究表明,中国的科技园区分布不均衡,主要分布在东部沿海地区,西部相对较少。中国的科技园区发展取得了重大成就,但是与发达国家的科技园区相比,差距很大。中国的科技园区要实施“二次创业”,在更高水平上发展,除了借鉴发达国家科技园区的成功经验之外,迫切需要科学的理论作为指导。
对科技园区的创新网络进行的研究表明,科技园区创新网络与产业集群之间存在相互促进的关系。同时,产业集群的形成对科技园区产业结构的相对变化有重要影响。随着科技园区创新网络和产业集群的扩展,产业集群逐渐向创新集群演变。产业集群只有不断创新,向创新集群发展,才能保证企业产品和科技园区产业持久的竞争力。
对科技园区创新集群的形成模式研究表明,产业、大学、政府三螺旋创新是科技园区创新集群形成的重要模式。从大学、企业、政府三元结构创新向大学、企业、政府三螺旋创新转变是科技园区技术创新的战略趋向。从三元结构创新向三螺旋创新转变有赖于科技园区管理机构、科技园区所在的地方政府乃至中央政府推动的科技制度的创新、大学使命的转变和政府运行机制的创新。三螺旋创新有效运行的关键是三元之间要形成互动的网络和良好的运作模式,
对将制度因素加入到经济增长模型的主要方法的研究表明,制度在中国科技园区发展过程中的增长效应,可以用市场化指数、非国有化率、对外开放度等变量作为代理制度变量。实证分析中,非国有经济增长率作为科技园区制度的代理变量更可行。
对高技术企业制度创新的研究表明,高技术企业制度创新的重点是产权制度创新和组织结构创新。高技术企业是以智力资本和人力资本为主要特征的合约,只有使产权的安排、报酬的支付与生产率相一致的高技术企业,才具有持久的发展力和竞争力。对科技园区制度创新内容的研究表明,科技园区制度创新的重点是科技园区立法创新,立法创新的核心是科技园区管理体制的定位问题。对科技园区制度创新模式的研究表明,中国科技园区制度创新正在由自上而下的制度创新向自下而上的制度创新转变、由供给主导型制度创新模式向需求诱导型制度创新模式转变。
对技术创新和制度创新的关系研究表明,技术创新与制度创新在发展高技术产业中何者更重要,要在成本—收益的框架下作出判断。如果技术创新的潜在收益大于制度创新的潜在收益,则技术创新重于制度创新,反之,则制度创新重于技术创新。在转型中国的背景下发展高技术产业和科技园区,制度创新重于技术创新。
对中国科技园区发展的实证研究和经验分析表明,中国科技园区的发展存在非均衡性特征,除了经济发展不平衡的一般规律以及科技园区发展的初始发展条件不同外,主要原因是技术及制度的差异。
本文认为,“创新—经济增长—科技园区发展”是一个有机的统一体,创新是经济增长的原因,又是经济增长的结果;创新与经济增长是制度变迁的原因,也是制度变迁的结果。在经济发展过程中,技术创新和制度创新密不可分、互相促进。创新是科技园区经济发展的动力。科技园区创新的根本目的是促进科技园区经济增长。制度创新、技术创新是决定科技园区经济发展的最主要因素,成功的科技园区一定是实现了技术创新与制度创新的有机结合。技术创新是科技园区发展的源动力,制度创新是科技园区发展的加速器。对处于转型时期的中国而言,应以制度创新为突破口,同时注重进行技术创新,从而推动中国科技园区的相对均衡发展。
The abilities of independent innovations, powers of high-tech industry development are important reflections of a country's comprehensive national strength. Science and Technology Parks(STPs) are playing great roles in improving the abilities of independent innovation and promoting the development of high-tech industries. Building STPs is an important means of developing high-tech industry clusters,enhancing independent innovation capabilities, which are utilized by all countries in the world. Researches on STPs are of great strategic importance.The strategy of "second venture" is being implemented by China's STPs. The guidance of scientific theories are needed by the strategic practices. Researches on China's STPs are of great realistic significance.
It was STPs,technological innovations and institutional innovations that was studied by scholars. However,it was rarely studied on the relationship between technological innovations and economic development of STPs and that of institutional innovations and economic development of STPs. It was less studied on the economic development of STPs from double perspectives of technological innovation and institutional innovation. The focus of this paper is the economic development issues of China's STPs. On the basis of summaries of STPs technological and institutional research results, from the current situation of China's STPs and American experiences, by establishing the STPs analytical framework containing both technological factors and institutional ones, the development of STPs was discussed by focusing on technological innovation, institutional innovation and the interaction between the two, taking technological innovation and institutional innovation as main analytical lines, by the means of combinations of microscopic analysis and macro analysis, empirical analysis and normative analysis,supported by the method of case studies.
The study on the current situation of world's STPs shows that they are of imbalance in distribution, most of the STPs are situated in few advanced industrialized countries, and few ones in developing countries.The basic experiences of Silicon Valley are innovations, including technological innovations and institutional innovations.
The deliberation on the development and economic effectiveness of China's STPs shows that China's STPs are of unequilibrium distributed, mainly located in the eastern coastal regions, western relatively small.China's STPs have made significant achievements, but the gaps are more terriblely larger compared with the STPs in developed countries.Scientific theories are urgently needed to guide China's STPs development at a higher level as the "second venture" is being implemented.
The research on STPs, innovation networks shows that there are mutual promoting relations between STPs innovation networks and industrial clusters.Meanwhile,the formation of industrial clusters has important effects on relative changes of the industrial structures. With the expansion of STPs innovation networks and industrial clusters, industrial clusters will gradually make evolutions to innovational clusters. Only constant innovations and the development of innovational clusters can guarantee the durable competitiveness of enterprises, products and STPs development.
The consideration on the formation models of innovational clusters shows that the triple helix innovation among universities, enterprises and government is an important innovational model which can form innovational clusters in STPs. Strategic trends of technological innovation in STPs will shift from three-element-structure innovation to triple helix innovation. Changes from three-element-structure innovation to triple helix innovation will depend on system innovations of science & technology, transformations of university missions and innovations of government operation mechanism which are promoted by STPs management agencies, local governments and even the central government.Interactive networks and good interactive patterns are the keys to the effective operations of triple helix innovations.
The study on the method of institution factors endogenicalized into the economic growth models shows that marketization index, non-nationalization rate, degree of outside-opening can be used as agentive variables to measure the growth effects during the development of China's STPs. It is more feasible that non-state-owned economic growth rate is used as a agent variable of STPs institutions during empirical analysis。The research on the institutional innovations of high-tech enterprises shows that the innovations of property rights and organizational structure are the main points of enterprises, innovations. High-tech enterprises are contracts mainly characterized by the features of intellectual and human capitals. Only the arrangements of property rights, the payments of remunerations are in lines with productivities in the high-tech enterprises can the enterprises possess enduring power and competitiveness.
The study on the contents of STPs institutional innovations shows that STPs legislation innovation is one of the important innovations, with the management system being the focus.The consideration on the model of STPs institutional innovation shows that the paradigms of STPs institutional innovation are shifting from top-down institutional innovations to bottom-up ones and from supply-oriented institutional innovations to need -induced ones.
The discussion on the relationship between technological innovations and institutional ones expresses that it should be judged under the cost-benefit framework what is more important during the development of high-tech industries.If the potential benefits of technological innovation is greater than that of institutional innovation,then technological innovation is more important than institutional innovation. Conversely, institutional innovation is more important than technological innovation.In the context of restructuring the development of China's high-tech industries and STPs, institutional innovation is more important than technological innovation.
The research on the development situation of China's STPs shows that the economic development of China's STPs possesses unbalanced characteristics, the reasons lie mainly in the differences of technology and institutions among the STPs in addition to the initial different developing conditions and the general laws of unbalanced economic development.
This paper believes that "innovation-economic growth-STPs development " is an organic entity. Innovation is the reason for economic growth, also the result of economic growth. Innovation and economic growth are the reasons for institutional changes, also the results of institutional changes. In the course of economic development, technological and institutional innovations are inseparable, and promoting each other. Technological innovation is the driving force of economic development of STPs.The fundamental purpose of STPs innovations is to promote economic growth in STPs.Institutional innovation and technological innovation are the two most important factors which determine the economic development of STPs. Successful STPs are surely to reach the combination of institutional innovation and technological innovation.Technical innovation is the dynamic source of STPs economic development,and institutional innovation is the accelerator of STPs economic development.With regard to the transition period of China,institutional innovation should be taken as a breach, simultaneously technological innovation should be attached importance on, thus the relatively balanced development of China's STPs will be realized.
引文
[1]埃茨科威兹,亨利.三螺旋——大学?产业?政府三元一体的创新战略.北京:东方出版社,2005
[2]埃茨科威兹,亨利,周春彦.区域创新发动者——不同三螺旋模式下的创业型大学.新加坡·第六届国际三螺旋大会主题论文,2007.5
[3]奥斯特罗姆,V?,D?菲尼,H?皮希特.制度分析与发展的分析——问题与抉择.北京:商务印书馆,1992
[4]奥尔斯顿,李,斯罗因?埃格特桑,道格拉斯?C?诺斯.制度变迁的经验研究.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[5]巴罗,罗伯特,哈维尔·萨拉伊马丁.经济增长.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000
[6]白波.中关村科技园区技术创新分析:[硕士学位论文].北方工业大学,2002
[7]常玉,董秋玲.科技园区技术创新能力影响因素与绩效的关系研究.软科学,2006,2(20):119-124
[8]陈俊.高科技园区立法研究.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[9]陈俊.高新技术产业的发展:高新区、产业集群、制度安排:[博士论文].西北农林科技大学,2004
[10]陈柳钦.基于产业集群的区域创新体系构建.新疆社会科学(汉文版),2005(3):37-42
[11]陈伟,罗来明.技术进步与经济增长的关系研究.社会科学研究,2002(4):44-46
[12]池仁勇,唐根年.基于投入与绩效评价的区域技术创新效率研究.科研管理, 2004,25(4):23-27
[13]池仁勇,虞晓芬,李正卫.我国东西部技术创新效率差异及其原因分析.中国软科学,2004(8):128-131
[14]仇保兴.入园企业的非集群化:科技园区发展的障碍.浙江经济,1998(12):11-15
[15]戴维?L?韦默.费方域、朱宝钦译.制度设计.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2004
[16]戴维斯,诺斯.制度创新的理论:描述、类推与说明.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[17]德鲁克,彼得.张炜译.创新与创业精神.上海:上海人民出版社、上海社会科学院出版社,2002
[18]德姆塞茨,阿尔钦.生产、信息费用与经济组织.见R?科斯,A?阿尔钦,D?诺斯.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联出版社,上海人民出版社,1994
[19]德姆塞茨,哈罗德.段毅才等译.所有权、控制与企业.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[20]邓金堂.高技术经济的制度演化研究兼论中国高技术经济的制度创新.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2003
[21]迪屈奇,迈克尔.王铁生,葛立成译.交易成本经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[22]董静.企业创新的制度设计.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2004
[23] [日]繁人都重.张敬惠等译.制度经济学回顾与反思.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2004
[24]范柏乃,刘超英,宋浩.国家高新技术产业开发区总量发展与结构变动统计分析.中国科技论坛, 2003(5): 107-109
[25]范旭,方一兵.区域创新系统中高校与政府和企业互动的五种典型模式.中国科技论坛,2004(1):66-70
[26]方齐云.科斯定律、相互性与公共领域.经济经纬,2001(5):10-12
[27]方一平,曾勇,李仕明.我国高新区经济发展规模数学模拟与区域差异比较研究.宁夏工程技术, 2005, 1(4): 1-4
[28]福斯,尼古莱?J,?克里斯安?克努森.企业万能——面向企业能力理论.大连:东北财经大学出版社,1998
[29]弗鲁博顿,埃里克,鲁道夫?芮切特.姜建强、罗长远译.新制度经济学——一个交易费用分析范式.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2006
[30]弗里曼,克利斯,罗克?苏特.华宏勋、华宏慈译.工业创新经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[31]弗罗门,杰克.经济演化——探究新制度经济学的理论基础.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[32]格罗斯曼,哈特.所有权、成本和收益:纵向一体化和横向一体化理论.见陈郁.企业制度与市场组织——交易费用经济学文选.上海:上海三联出版社,上海人民出版社,1996
[33]顾海.中国高新技术园区发展瓶颈因素分析及对策.中国科技论坛,2001(3):41-44
[34]顾朝林,赵令勋.中国高技术产业与园区.北京:中信出版社,1998
[35]官建成,史晓敏.技术创新能力与技术创新绩效关系研究.中国机械工程, 2004,11(15):100–104
[36]韩伯棠,李强,朱美光等.基于熵理论的高新区发展不均衡度评价.科学学研究,2005,3(23):342-346
[37]韩晶,朱洪泉.经济增长的制度因素分析.南开经济研究,2000(4):53-61
[38]贺菊煌.中国经济增长的两个主要因索.见:中国经济增长与可持续发展.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1998
[39]贺雄飞.新经济与大企业家.广州:广东旅游出版社,2000
[40]胡明晖.我国科技工业园制度建设研究:[硕士论文].郑州大学,2003
[41]胡明铭.区域创新系统理论与建设研究综述.外国经济与管理,2004,9(26):45-49
[42]胡乃武,金碚.国外经济增长理论比较研究.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990
[43]胡兴祥,刘志迎.中外高新技术产业开发区的比较及其启示.合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版),2002(16)12:131—136
[44]计志英.制度变迁视角下经济增长理论的发展路径与主要思想述评.长春工业大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2):6-9
[45]贾若祥.产业集群概念辨析及对区域发展的作用,人民网, http://theory.people.com.cn/GB/49154/49155/3818282. html
[46]江兵,杨蕾,杨善林.区域创新系统理论与结构模型.合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版),2005,1(19):33-39
[47]金玉国.宏观制度变迁对转型时期中国经济增长的贡献.财经科学,2001(2):24-28
[48]卡兹,卡罗琳.成功的肖像:硅谷先驱者印象.Tioga出版公司,1986
[49]卡斯特尔,M, P?霍尔.世界的高技术园区.北京:北京理工大学出版社,1998
[50]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学——社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆,2002
[51]科斯,R.论生产的制度结构.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[52]科斯,R,哈特,斯蒂格利茨著.拉斯?沃因、汉斯?韦坎德编.李风圣译.契约经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[53]科斯,R,A?阿尔钦,D?诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994
[54]科斯,R,诺斯,威廉姆森等著.克劳德?梅内尔编.制度、契约与组织—从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[55]拉坦,V?W?.诱致性制度变迁理论.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[56]雷钦礼.制度变迁、技术创新与经济增长.北京:中国统计出版社,2003
[57]雷霆.中国高新技术产业发展的制度与机制创新研究:[博士论文].中共中央党校,2001
[58]李嘉图,大卫.政治经济学及赋税原理.北京:商务印书馆,1962
[59]李小宁.经济增长的制度分析模型.数量经济技术经济研究,2005(1):3-17
[60]李建军.硅谷模式及其产学创新体制:[博士论文].中国人民大学,2000
[61]李智.制度内生化的经济增长模型.特区经济,2007(1):246-247
[62] [韩]李钟文(Chong-Moon Lee).硅谷优势——创新与创业精神的栖息地.北京:人民出版社,2002
[63]厉以宁.中国高新区论坛之一:地位作用与开发经验.北京:经济科学出版社,2004
[64]林汉川,叶红雨.高新技术企业更需产权制度创新.中国工业经济,2001(6):65-69
[65]林金忠.企业组织的经济学分析.北京:商务印书馆,2004
[66]林毅夫.关于制度变迁的经济学理论:诱致性变迁与强制性变迁.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[67]林毅夫、蔡昉、李周.中国的奇迹:发展战略与经济改革(增订版).上海:上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1999
[68]林迎星.国外区域创新系统研究综述.中国科技论坛,2004(6):65-69
[69]刘和东,耿修林,梁东黎.技术创新的激励因子及其效应比较——以中国大中型工业企业为对象的实证分析.科学学研究,2005,2(23):278–282
[70]刘红,唐元虎.现代经济增长:一个制度作为内生变量的模型.预测,2001(1):24-28
[71]刘建武.我国高新技术产业发展的制度创新研究:[博士论文].西北大学,2002
[72]刘曙光,刘佳.区域创新系统研究的国内进展综述.经济师,2005(1):8-9
[73]刘伟,李绍荣.所有制变化与经济增长和要素效率提升.经济研究,2001(1):3-9
[74]刘易斯,阿瑟.周师铭、沈丙杰、沈伯根译.经济增长理论.北京:商务印书馆,1983
[75]刘颖.制度创新与科技园区发展——基于西安高新区的实证分析:[硕士论文].西安科技大学,2004
[76]刘友金,黄鲁成.产业集群的区域创新优势与我国科技园区的发展.中国工业经济,2001(2):33-37
[77]刘紫娇.基于企业家精神的企业创新网络.中国科技论文在线, http://ww.paper.edu.cn/
[78]卢现祥.西方新制度经济学(修订版).北京:中国发展出版社,2003
[79]卢现祥,朱巧玲.新制度经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2007
[80]鲁开根,增长的新空间——产业集群核心能力研究.北京:经济科学出版社,2006
[81]吕中楼.新制度经济学研究.北京:中国经济出版社,2005
[82]吕政,张克俊.国家高新区阶段转换的界面障碍及破解思路.中国工业经济,2006(2) :5-12
[83]罗杰斯,M.,K.拉森.硅谷热.北京:中国友谊出版公司,1986
[84]马健.经济增长中的制度因素分析.经济科学,1999(5):46-51
[85]马强,远德玉.技术创新与产业结构的演化.社会科学辑刊,2004(2):27-31
[86]马歇尔,阿尔弗雷德.经济学原理.廉运杰译.北京:华夏出版社,2005
[87]孟夏.经济增长的内生技术分析.天津:天津人民出版社,2001
[88]莫燕.区域R&D绩效评价.科研管理,2004,1(25):114-117
[89]牟宝柱.中国高新技术产业开发区理论与实践.北京:中国物价出版社,1999
[90]诺斯,道格拉斯.陈郁,罗华平等译.经济史中的结构与变迁.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994
[91]诺斯,道格拉斯,R·P·托马斯.西方世界的兴起:新经济史.北京:北京学苑出版社,1988
[92]诺斯,道格拉斯.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[93]潘士远.内生制度与经济增长.浙江社会科学,2005(5):23-31
[94]彭连会,孙金宇.企业家精神在技术创新中的作用.辽宁工程技术大学学报(社会科学版),2006,2(8):165-166
[95]彭澎.政府角色论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2002
[96]皮建才.制度变迁、技术进步与经济增长:另一种视角.人文杂志,2006(3):63-67
[97]平乔维奇,斯韦托扎尔.蒋琳琦译.产权经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[98]钱颖一,肖梦.走出误区:经济学家论说硅谷模式.北京:中国经济出版社,2000
[99]钱颖一.硅谷故事.经济社会体制比较,2000(1):28-35
[100]青木昌彦.比较制度分析.上海:上海远东出版社,2001
[101]琼斯,查尔斯.经济增长导论.北京:北京大学出版社,2002
[102]沙博,迪迪耶.资产专用性、工作组织和命令模式:对汽车行业的初步观察.见R?科斯,诺斯,威廉姆森等著.克劳德?梅内尔编.制度、契约与组织——从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[103]萨克森宁,安纳利.地区优势:硅谷和128公路地区的文化与竞争.上海:上海远东出版社,2000
[104]邵非.我国科技工业园区发展障碍及对策研究.衡阳师范学院学报(社科版),2000(1):33-37
[105]沈必扬,池也勇.企业创新网络:企业技术创新研究的一个新范式.科研管理, 2005,26(3):84-91
[106]石磊,寇宗来.经济增长与制度创新的不可分性及其联合生产模型——对经济长波的进一步解释.上海经济研究,1999(3):18-22
[107]舒元,徐现祥.中国经济增长模型的设定:1952—1988.经济研究,2002(11):32-36
[108]斯密,亚当.国民财富的性质和原因的研究.北京:商务印书馆,1972
[109]斯密德,阿兰.刘桀、吴水荣译.制度与行为经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004
[110]斯泰尔,本,戴维?维克托,理查德?内尔森.技术创新与经济绩效.上海:上海人民出版社,2006
[111]宋德勇.工业化、市场化、国际化与中国经济增长——对“中国奇迹”的一种解释.经济工作者学习资料,2000(4):31-37
[112]苏竣,姚志峰.“孵化器”的孵化——三螺旋理论的解释.中国科技论文在线,http://www.paper.edu.cn
[113]孙洛平,孙海琳.产业集群的交易费用理论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006
[114]孙诚,冯之浚.企业自主创新与企业家精神.中国科技论坛,2006(4):3-5
[115]孙敬霞,岳瑞凤,胡明晖.区域创新系统理论研究综述.中原工学院学报,2004(6):11-15
[116]孙劭方.高新区创新网络的理论模型及培育研究——兼论洛阳高新区创新网络:[硕士论文].河南大学,2001
[117]孙学玉.企业型政府.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[118]孙万松.高新区自主创新与核心竞争力.北京:中国经济出版社,2006
[119]索洛,罗伯特·M·等.史清琪等选译.经济增长因素分析.北京:商务印书馆,1991
[120]谭崇台.发展经济学.上海:上海人民出版社,1989
[121]唐晓云.关于制度变迁与经济增长的几点认识.当代财经,2002(3):3-6
[122]汪丁丁.经济发展与制度创新.上海:上海人民出版社,1995
[123]王成军.官产学三重螺旋研究——知识与选择.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[124]王缉慈.创新的空间——企业集群与区域发展.北京:北京大学出版社,2001
[125]王瑞泽,陈德山.经济增长模型中的制度变量及其代理变量的选择:一个文献综述.山东经济,2006(2):14-18
[126]王小鲁.中国经济增长的可持续性与制度变革.经济研究,2000(7):3-15
[127]王泽填,卢二坡.制度、增长与收敛——一个基于索洛模型的分析框架.财经理论与实践,2007,146(28):33-39
[128]魏后凯.现代区域经济学.北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[129]魏心镇,王缉慈.新的产业空间:高技术产业开发区的发展与布局.北京:北京大学出版社,1993
[130]吴敬琏.发展高新技术产业——制度重于技术.北京:中国发展出版社,2002
[131]吴林海.科技园区研究:一个新的理论分析框架.科学管理研究,2003,5(21):19-24
[132]吴玉鸣,徐建华,李建霞等.国家级高新技术产业开发区发展能力与分类研究.人文地理,2003,18(2):15-19
[133]夏兰,周钟山等.基于网络结构视角的产业集群演化和创新.北京:中国市场出版社,2006
[134]夏海钧.中国高新区发展之路.北京:中信出版社,2001
[135]谢永琴.产业集群理论与我国高新区发展研究.生产力研究,2004(10):124-125
[136]熊彼特,约瑟夫.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[137]熊彼特,约瑟夫.资本主义、社会主义和民主.北京:商务印书馆,2000
[138]休斯,欧文.公共管理导论.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001
[139]徐则荣.创新理论大师熊彼特经济思想研究.北京:首都经济贸易大学出版社, 2006
[140]杨瑞龙.我国制度变迁方式转换的三阶段论——兼论地方政府的制度创新行为.经济研究,1998(1):5-12
[141]原毅军.企业组织结构创新与管理咨询业发展.中国软科学,2000(11):101-104
[142]杨小凯,黄有光.专业化与经济组织.张玉纲译.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[143]叶飞文.要素投入与中国经济增长.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[144]原山优子.硅谷的产业发展与斯坦福大学所设课程的变迁.见:青木昌彦、泽昭裕、大东道郎、通产研究评论编辑委员会.大学改革—课题和争议.东洋经济新报社,2001
[145]袁声莉.经济转型期企业员工激励模式研究.北京:中国财政经济出版社,2005
[146]袁庆明.新制度经济学.北京:中国发展出版社,2005
[147]曾忠禄.产业群集与区域经济发展.南开经济研究,1997(1):69-73
[148]张成福,党秀云.公共管理学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001
[149]张范洲.企业集群与技术创新.价值工程,2004,23(6):27-30
[150]张彩波,韩伯棠,李强等.熵权法优属度矢量模型与我国高新区发展研究.北京:北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2005,4(7):40-43
[151]张海生,林芸.国家高新区产业集群向创新集群迈进.中国高新技术产业导报,2007-1-11
[152]张金瑞.技术进步与经济发展.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990
[153]张建华.创新、激励与经济发展.武汉:华中理工大学出版社,2000
[154]张景安,亨利?罗文.创业精神与创新集群——硅谷的启示.上海:复旦大学出版社,2002
[155]张其佐.高技术产业:发展机制与制度创新:[博士论文].西南财经大学,2002
[156]张克俊.我国高科技园区建设的比较研究.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2005
[157]张培刚.农业与工业化(中下卷).武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2002
[158]张伟峰,万威武.复杂性技术创新与企业创新网络的共生演化.山西财经大学学报,2003,25(5):56-59
[159]张卫东.现代产权理论及其在中国的应用.见:向松祚,高小勇.五常思想.北京:朝华出版社,2006
[160]张卫东.微观经济学.北京:首都经济贸易大学出版社,2003
[161]张卫东,钟熙维.现代企业理论.武汉:湖北人民出版社,2002
[162]张卫东,吴毅.从不平衡到平衡:区域经济发展的国际经验.湖北社会科学,2000(6):15-17
[163]张五常.经济解释-张五常经济论文选.易宪容,张卫东译.北京:商务印书馆,2001
[164]中国社会科学院经济研究所宏观课题组.投资、周期波动与制度性紧缩效应——当前中国宏观经济分析.经济研究,1999(3):16-25
[165]郑静,薛德升等.论城市开发区的发展:历史进程、理论背景及生命周期.世界地理研究,2000,9(2):79-86
[166]钟坚.世界硅谷模式的制度分析.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[167]钟书华.科技园区管理.北京:科学出版社,2004
[168]周元.高新区阶段发展论与”二次创业”的核心能力.科技成果纵横,2003(2):8-11
[169]朱建荣.高新技术园区的创新网络效应与企业集群化相关性研究.科技进步与对策,2005(10):12-14
[170]朱勇.新增长理论.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[171]朱煜.制度创新与高新技术产业开发区的发展:[硕士论文].西安建筑科技大学,2004
[172]左大培,杨春学.经济增长理论模型的内生化历程.北京:中国经济出版社,2007
[173] Ahuja G, Katila R. Technological Acquisition and the Innovation Performance ofAcquiring Firms:A Longitudinal Study. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22):197-220
[174] Andersson,M.,C.Karlasson. Regional Innovation Systems in Small & Medium-sized Regions: a Critical Review & Assessment. JIBS Working Paper Series, 2002(2): 67-72
[175] Asheim,B.,P.Cooke. Local Learning and Interactive Innovation Networks in a Global Economy. in Edward J.et al(eds). Making Connections:Technological Learning and Regional Economic Change. Ashgate, 1998
[176] Barro,R.J. Democracy and Growth.Journal of Economic Growth. 1996 (3):1-27
[177] Casper,S.. High Technology Governance and Institutional Adaptiveness. Discussion Paper. Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies, 1999
[178] Cooke,P.. From Technopoles to Regional Innovation Systems: the Evolution of Localized Technology Development Policy. University of Wales ,UK., 2001
[179] Ebner ,A.r. Innovation Policies and Locational Competitiveness:Lessons from Singapore. 1st ASIALICS International Conference on“Innovation Systems and Clusters in Asia:Challenges and Regional Integration”,Bangkok,Thailand, 2004
[180] Fischer,M.. the Innovation Process and Network Activities of Manufacturing Firms. In Fischer,M., Suarez-Villa,L.&Steiner, M(eds)Innovation, Networks and Localities, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999
[181] Fischer,M... Innovation,Knowledge Creation and System of Innovation. Analysis of Regional Science, 2001, 35: 199-216
[182] Freeman C, Soete L. The Economics of Industrial Innovation .MIT, 1998
[183] Griliches Z. Patents as Economic Indicators:A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 2000, 28(4):1661-1707
[184] Guangzhou HU,Albert. Technology Parks and Regional Economic Growth in China. National University of Singapore, 2005
[185] Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. Designing Efficient Institutions for Science-basedEntrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, Technology Transfer, 2001(26):207-231
[186] Keefer,Philip and Stephen Knack. Institutions and Economic Performance: Cross-country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Measures. Economics and Politics, 1995(7): 207-227
[187] Kinlgren, A.. the Development of Science Parks in St.Petersburg(Russia). University of Glasgow, 2004
[188] Kitagawa ,F.. Innovation Systems, University-Business Networks and Regionali- zation of the Knowledge Economy in Japan. Regionalization of Innovation Policy—Option and Experience, Berlin, 2004
[189] Kon ,F. C.,Winston T.H.Kon,Feichin Ted Tschang. An Analytical Framework for Science Parks and Technology Districts with an Application to Singapore, SMU Economics & Statistics Working Paper Series. Singapore Management University, 2003
[190] Kormendi,R..and Philip G. Meguire. Macroeconomic Determinants of Growth: Cross-Country Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1985(9): 141-163
[191] Kumar, S.. Innovative Capability and Performanceof Chnese Firms. Journal of Development Studies, 2002, (2): 59-67
[192] Lucas,R..On The Mechanic of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988(22): 4-42
[193] Porter,M.E.The Comparative Advantage of Nations. New York: Macmilan, 1990
[194] Poti B, Basile R. Differences in Innovation Performance Between Advanced and Backward Regions in Italy[R]. CNR- ISRDS, 2000
[195] Ressico ,A.. Innovative Enterprises in Science Park: Difficulty and Route of Growth. 13th Nordic Conference on Small Business Research, 2004
[196] Rubini ,D.. A Critical Analysis of Science and Technology Parks:Learning from the Italian Experience. University of Lisboa, 2002
[197] Sanz,L..the Role of Science & Technology Park in Economic Development. International Association of Science Parks (IASP), 2001
[198] Thomas,J.. Institutional Innovation and the Prospects for Transference: Transferring Singaporean Institutions to Suzhou China. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2001
[199] Wallsten,S.. the Role of Government in Regional High-Tech Development: the Effects of Public Venture Capital and Science Parks. Stanford University, 2001
[200] Wallsten,S..Do Science Parks Generate Regional Economic Growth? An Empirical Analysis of their Effects on Job Growth and Venture Capital. Working Paper, American Enterprise Institute, 2004
[201] Xie linliu, Steven White. Innovation and Firm Performance. Econometric Explorations of Survey Data Palgrave . London,2001
[202] Uzawa H. Optimal Technical Change in an Aggregate Aggregative Model of Economic Growth. International Economic Review, 1965(6): 8-31
[2]埃茨科威兹,亨利,周春彦.区域创新发动者——不同三螺旋模式下的创业型大学.新加坡·第六届国际三螺旋大会主题论文,2007.5
[3]奥斯特罗姆,V?,D?菲尼,H?皮希特.制度分析与发展的分析——问题与抉择.北京:商务印书馆,1992
[4]奥尔斯顿,李,斯罗因?埃格特桑,道格拉斯?C?诺斯.制度变迁的经验研究.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[5]巴罗,罗伯特,哈维尔·萨拉伊马丁.经济增长.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000
[6]白波.中关村科技园区技术创新分析:[硕士学位论文].北方工业大学,2002
[7]常玉,董秋玲.科技园区技术创新能力影响因素与绩效的关系研究.软科学,2006,2(20):119-124
[8]陈俊.高科技园区立法研究.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[9]陈俊.高新技术产业的发展:高新区、产业集群、制度安排:[博士论文].西北农林科技大学,2004
[10]陈柳钦.基于产业集群的区域创新体系构建.新疆社会科学(汉文版),2005(3):37-42
[11]陈伟,罗来明.技术进步与经济增长的关系研究.社会科学研究,2002(4):44-46
[12]池仁勇,唐根年.基于投入与绩效评价的区域技术创新效率研究.科研管理, 2004,25(4):23-27
[13]池仁勇,虞晓芬,李正卫.我国东西部技术创新效率差异及其原因分析.中国软科学,2004(8):128-131
[14]仇保兴.入园企业的非集群化:科技园区发展的障碍.浙江经济,1998(12):11-15
[15]戴维?L?韦默.费方域、朱宝钦译.制度设计.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2004
[16]戴维斯,诺斯.制度创新的理论:描述、类推与说明.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[17]德鲁克,彼得.张炜译.创新与创业精神.上海:上海人民出版社、上海社会科学院出版社,2002
[18]德姆塞茨,阿尔钦.生产、信息费用与经济组织.见R?科斯,A?阿尔钦,D?诺斯.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联出版社,上海人民出版社,1994
[19]德姆塞茨,哈罗德.段毅才等译.所有权、控制与企业.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[20]邓金堂.高技术经济的制度演化研究兼论中国高技术经济的制度创新.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2003
[21]迪屈奇,迈克尔.王铁生,葛立成译.交易成本经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[22]董静.企业创新的制度设计.上海:上海财经大学出版社,2004
[23] [日]繁人都重.张敬惠等译.制度经济学回顾与反思.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2004
[24]范柏乃,刘超英,宋浩.国家高新技术产业开发区总量发展与结构变动统计分析.中国科技论坛, 2003(5): 107-109
[25]范旭,方一兵.区域创新系统中高校与政府和企业互动的五种典型模式.中国科技论坛,2004(1):66-70
[26]方齐云.科斯定律、相互性与公共领域.经济经纬,2001(5):10-12
[27]方一平,曾勇,李仕明.我国高新区经济发展规模数学模拟与区域差异比较研究.宁夏工程技术, 2005, 1(4): 1-4
[28]福斯,尼古莱?J,?克里斯安?克努森.企业万能——面向企业能力理论.大连:东北财经大学出版社,1998
[29]弗鲁博顿,埃里克,鲁道夫?芮切特.姜建强、罗长远译.新制度经济学——一个交易费用分析范式.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,2006
[30]弗里曼,克利斯,罗克?苏特.华宏勋、华宏慈译.工业创新经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[31]弗罗门,杰克.经济演化——探究新制度经济学的理论基础.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[32]格罗斯曼,哈特.所有权、成本和收益:纵向一体化和横向一体化理论.见陈郁.企业制度与市场组织——交易费用经济学文选.上海:上海三联出版社,上海人民出版社,1996
[33]顾海.中国高新技术园区发展瓶颈因素分析及对策.中国科技论坛,2001(3):41-44
[34]顾朝林,赵令勋.中国高技术产业与园区.北京:中信出版社,1998
[35]官建成,史晓敏.技术创新能力与技术创新绩效关系研究.中国机械工程, 2004,11(15):100–104
[36]韩伯棠,李强,朱美光等.基于熵理论的高新区发展不均衡度评价.科学学研究,2005,3(23):342-346
[37]韩晶,朱洪泉.经济增长的制度因素分析.南开经济研究,2000(4):53-61
[38]贺菊煌.中国经济增长的两个主要因索.见:中国经济增长与可持续发展.北京:社会科学文献出版社,1998
[39]贺雄飞.新经济与大企业家.广州:广东旅游出版社,2000
[40]胡明晖.我国科技工业园制度建设研究:[硕士论文].郑州大学,2003
[41]胡明铭.区域创新系统理论与建设研究综述.外国经济与管理,2004,9(26):45-49
[42]胡乃武,金碚.国外经济增长理论比较研究.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990
[43]胡兴祥,刘志迎.中外高新技术产业开发区的比较及其启示.合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版),2002(16)12:131—136
[44]计志英.制度变迁视角下经济增长理论的发展路径与主要思想述评.长春工业大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2):6-9
[45]贾若祥.产业集群概念辨析及对区域发展的作用,人民网, http://theory.people.com.cn/GB/49154/49155/3818282. html
[46]江兵,杨蕾,杨善林.区域创新系统理论与结构模型.合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版),2005,1(19):33-39
[47]金玉国.宏观制度变迁对转型时期中国经济增长的贡献.财经科学,2001(2):24-28
[48]卡兹,卡罗琳.成功的肖像:硅谷先驱者印象.Tioga出版公司,1986
[49]卡斯特尔,M, P?霍尔.世界的高技术园区.北京:北京理工大学出版社,1998
[50]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学——社会秩序与公共政策.北京:商务印书馆,2002
[51]科斯,R.论生产的制度结构.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[52]科斯,R,哈特,斯蒂格利茨著.拉斯?沃因、汉斯?韦坎德编.李风圣译.契约经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[53]科斯,R,A?阿尔钦,D?诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁——产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994
[54]科斯,R,诺斯,威廉姆森等著.克劳德?梅内尔编.制度、契约与组织—从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[55]拉坦,V?W?.诱致性制度变迁理论.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[56]雷钦礼.制度变迁、技术创新与经济增长.北京:中国统计出版社,2003
[57]雷霆.中国高新技术产业发展的制度与机制创新研究:[博士论文].中共中央党校,2001
[58]李嘉图,大卫.政治经济学及赋税原理.北京:商务印书馆,1962
[59]李小宁.经济增长的制度分析模型.数量经济技术经济研究,2005(1):3-17
[60]李建军.硅谷模式及其产学创新体制:[博士论文].中国人民大学,2000
[61]李智.制度内生化的经济增长模型.特区经济,2007(1):246-247
[62] [韩]李钟文(Chong-Moon Lee).硅谷优势——创新与创业精神的栖息地.北京:人民出版社,2002
[63]厉以宁.中国高新区论坛之一:地位作用与开发经验.北京:经济科学出版社,2004
[64]林汉川,叶红雨.高新技术企业更需产权制度创新.中国工业经济,2001(6):65-69
[65]林金忠.企业组织的经济学分析.北京:商务印书馆,2004
[66]林毅夫.关于制度变迁的经济学理论:诱致性变迁与强制性变迁.见:R?科斯,A·阿尔钦,D·诺斯等.财产权利与制度变迁—产权学派与新制度学派译文集.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[67]林毅夫、蔡昉、李周.中国的奇迹:发展战略与经济改革(增订版).上海:上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1999
[68]林迎星.国外区域创新系统研究综述.中国科技论坛,2004(6):65-69
[69]刘和东,耿修林,梁东黎.技术创新的激励因子及其效应比较——以中国大中型工业企业为对象的实证分析.科学学研究,2005,2(23):278–282
[70]刘红,唐元虎.现代经济增长:一个制度作为内生变量的模型.预测,2001(1):24-28
[71]刘建武.我国高新技术产业发展的制度创新研究:[博士论文].西北大学,2002
[72]刘曙光,刘佳.区域创新系统研究的国内进展综述.经济师,2005(1):8-9
[73]刘伟,李绍荣.所有制变化与经济增长和要素效率提升.经济研究,2001(1):3-9
[74]刘易斯,阿瑟.周师铭、沈丙杰、沈伯根译.经济增长理论.北京:商务印书馆,1983
[75]刘颖.制度创新与科技园区发展——基于西安高新区的实证分析:[硕士论文].西安科技大学,2004
[76]刘友金,黄鲁成.产业集群的区域创新优势与我国科技园区的发展.中国工业经济,2001(2):33-37
[77]刘紫娇.基于企业家精神的企业创新网络.中国科技论文在线, http://ww.paper.edu.cn/
[78]卢现祥.西方新制度经济学(修订版).北京:中国发展出版社,2003
[79]卢现祥,朱巧玲.新制度经济学.北京:北京大学出版社,2007
[80]鲁开根,增长的新空间——产业集群核心能力研究.北京:经济科学出版社,2006
[81]吕中楼.新制度经济学研究.北京:中国经济出版社,2005
[82]吕政,张克俊.国家高新区阶段转换的界面障碍及破解思路.中国工业经济,2006(2) :5-12
[83]罗杰斯,M.,K.拉森.硅谷热.北京:中国友谊出版公司,1986
[84]马健.经济增长中的制度因素分析.经济科学,1999(5):46-51
[85]马强,远德玉.技术创新与产业结构的演化.社会科学辑刊,2004(2):27-31
[86]马歇尔,阿尔弗雷德.经济学原理.廉运杰译.北京:华夏出版社,2005
[87]孟夏.经济增长的内生技术分析.天津:天津人民出版社,2001
[88]莫燕.区域R&D绩效评价.科研管理,2004,1(25):114-117
[89]牟宝柱.中国高新技术产业开发区理论与实践.北京:中国物价出版社,1999
[90]诺斯,道格拉斯.陈郁,罗华平等译.经济史中的结构与变迁.上海:上海三联书店,上海人民出版社,1994
[91]诺斯,道格拉斯,R·P·托马斯.西方世界的兴起:新经济史.北京:北京学苑出版社,1988
[92]诺斯,道格拉斯.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效.上海:上海三联书店,1994
[93]潘士远.内生制度与经济增长.浙江社会科学,2005(5):23-31
[94]彭连会,孙金宇.企业家精神在技术创新中的作用.辽宁工程技术大学学报(社会科学版),2006,2(8):165-166
[95]彭澎.政府角色论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2002
[96]皮建才.制度变迁、技术进步与经济增长:另一种视角.人文杂志,2006(3):63-67
[97]平乔维奇,斯韦托扎尔.蒋琳琦译.产权经济学.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[98]钱颖一,肖梦.走出误区:经济学家论说硅谷模式.北京:中国经济出版社,2000
[99]钱颖一.硅谷故事.经济社会体制比较,2000(1):28-35
[100]青木昌彦.比较制度分析.上海:上海远东出版社,2001
[101]琼斯,查尔斯.经济增长导论.北京:北京大学出版社,2002
[102]沙博,迪迪耶.资产专用性、工作组织和命令模式:对汽车行业的初步观察.见R?科斯,诺斯,威廉姆森等著.克劳德?梅内尔编.制度、契约与组织——从新制度经济学角度的透视.北京:经济科学出版社,2003
[103]萨克森宁,安纳利.地区优势:硅谷和128公路地区的文化与竞争.上海:上海远东出版社,2000
[104]邵非.我国科技工业园区发展障碍及对策研究.衡阳师范学院学报(社科版),2000(1):33-37
[105]沈必扬,池也勇.企业创新网络:企业技术创新研究的一个新范式.科研管理, 2005,26(3):84-91
[106]石磊,寇宗来.经济增长与制度创新的不可分性及其联合生产模型——对经济长波的进一步解释.上海经济研究,1999(3):18-22
[107]舒元,徐现祥.中国经济增长模型的设定:1952—1988.经济研究,2002(11):32-36
[108]斯密,亚当.国民财富的性质和原因的研究.北京:商务印书馆,1972
[109]斯密德,阿兰.刘桀、吴水荣译.制度与行为经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004
[110]斯泰尔,本,戴维?维克托,理查德?内尔森.技术创新与经济绩效.上海:上海人民出版社,2006
[111]宋德勇.工业化、市场化、国际化与中国经济增长——对“中国奇迹”的一种解释.经济工作者学习资料,2000(4):31-37
[112]苏竣,姚志峰.“孵化器”的孵化——三螺旋理论的解释.中国科技论文在线,http://www.paper.edu.cn
[113]孙洛平,孙海琳.产业集群的交易费用理论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2006
[114]孙诚,冯之浚.企业自主创新与企业家精神.中国科技论坛,2006(4):3-5
[115]孙敬霞,岳瑞凤,胡明晖.区域创新系统理论研究综述.中原工学院学报,2004(6):11-15
[116]孙劭方.高新区创新网络的理论模型及培育研究——兼论洛阳高新区创新网络:[硕士论文].河南大学,2001
[117]孙学玉.企业型政府.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[118]孙万松.高新区自主创新与核心竞争力.北京:中国经济出版社,2006
[119]索洛,罗伯特·M·等.史清琪等选译.经济增长因素分析.北京:商务印书馆,1991
[120]谭崇台.发展经济学.上海:上海人民出版社,1989
[121]唐晓云.关于制度变迁与经济增长的几点认识.当代财经,2002(3):3-6
[122]汪丁丁.经济发展与制度创新.上海:上海人民出版社,1995
[123]王成军.官产学三重螺旋研究——知识与选择.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005
[124]王缉慈.创新的空间——企业集群与区域发展.北京:北京大学出版社,2001
[125]王瑞泽,陈德山.经济增长模型中的制度变量及其代理变量的选择:一个文献综述.山东经济,2006(2):14-18
[126]王小鲁.中国经济增长的可持续性与制度变革.经济研究,2000(7):3-15
[127]王泽填,卢二坡.制度、增长与收敛——一个基于索洛模型的分析框架.财经理论与实践,2007,146(28):33-39
[128]魏后凯.现代区域经济学.北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[129]魏心镇,王缉慈.新的产业空间:高技术产业开发区的发展与布局.北京:北京大学出版社,1993
[130]吴敬琏.发展高新技术产业——制度重于技术.北京:中国发展出版社,2002
[131]吴林海.科技园区研究:一个新的理论分析框架.科学管理研究,2003,5(21):19-24
[132]吴玉鸣,徐建华,李建霞等.国家级高新技术产业开发区发展能力与分类研究.人文地理,2003,18(2):15-19
[133]夏兰,周钟山等.基于网络结构视角的产业集群演化和创新.北京:中国市场出版社,2006
[134]夏海钧.中国高新区发展之路.北京:中信出版社,2001
[135]谢永琴.产业集群理论与我国高新区发展研究.生产力研究,2004(10):124-125
[136]熊彼特,约瑟夫.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆,1997
[137]熊彼特,约瑟夫.资本主义、社会主义和民主.北京:商务印书馆,2000
[138]休斯,欧文.公共管理导论.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001
[139]徐则荣.创新理论大师熊彼特经济思想研究.北京:首都经济贸易大学出版社, 2006
[140]杨瑞龙.我国制度变迁方式转换的三阶段论——兼论地方政府的制度创新行为.经济研究,1998(1):5-12
[141]原毅军.企业组织结构创新与管理咨询业发展.中国软科学,2000(11):101-104
[142]杨小凯,黄有光.专业化与经济组织.张玉纲译.北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[143]叶飞文.要素投入与中国经济增长.北京:北京大学出版社,2004
[144]原山优子.硅谷的产业发展与斯坦福大学所设课程的变迁.见:青木昌彦、泽昭裕、大东道郎、通产研究评论编辑委员会.大学改革—课题和争议.东洋经济新报社,2001
[145]袁声莉.经济转型期企业员工激励模式研究.北京:中国财政经济出版社,2005
[146]袁庆明.新制度经济学.北京:中国发展出版社,2005
[147]曾忠禄.产业群集与区域经济发展.南开经济研究,1997(1):69-73
[148]张成福,党秀云.公共管理学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2001
[149]张范洲.企业集群与技术创新.价值工程,2004,23(6):27-30
[150]张彩波,韩伯棠,李强等.熵权法优属度矢量模型与我国高新区发展研究.北京:北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2005,4(7):40-43
[151]张海生,林芸.国家高新区产业集群向创新集群迈进.中国高新技术产业导报,2007-1-11
[152]张金瑞.技术进步与经济发展.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1990
[153]张建华.创新、激励与经济发展.武汉:华中理工大学出版社,2000
[154]张景安,亨利?罗文.创业精神与创新集群——硅谷的启示.上海:复旦大学出版社,2002
[155]张其佐.高技术产业:发展机制与制度创新:[博士论文].西南财经大学,2002
[156]张克俊.我国高科技园区建设的比较研究.成都:西南财经大学出版社,2005
[157]张培刚.农业与工业化(中下卷).武汉:华中科技大学出版社,2002
[158]张伟峰,万威武.复杂性技术创新与企业创新网络的共生演化.山西财经大学学报,2003,25(5):56-59
[159]张卫东.现代产权理论及其在中国的应用.见:向松祚,高小勇.五常思想.北京:朝华出版社,2006
[160]张卫东.微观经济学.北京:首都经济贸易大学出版社,2003
[161]张卫东,钟熙维.现代企业理论.武汉:湖北人民出版社,2002
[162]张卫东,吴毅.从不平衡到平衡:区域经济发展的国际经验.湖北社会科学,2000(6):15-17
[163]张五常.经济解释-张五常经济论文选.易宪容,张卫东译.北京:商务印书馆,2001
[164]中国社会科学院经济研究所宏观课题组.投资、周期波动与制度性紧缩效应——当前中国宏观经济分析.经济研究,1999(3):16-25
[165]郑静,薛德升等.论城市开发区的发展:历史进程、理论背景及生命周期.世界地理研究,2000,9(2):79-86
[166]钟坚.世界硅谷模式的制度分析.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2001
[167]钟书华.科技园区管理.北京:科学出版社,2004
[168]周元.高新区阶段发展论与”二次创业”的核心能力.科技成果纵横,2003(2):8-11
[169]朱建荣.高新技术园区的创新网络效应与企业集群化相关性研究.科技进步与对策,2005(10):12-14
[170]朱勇.新增长理论.北京:商务印书馆,1999
[171]朱煜.制度创新与高新技术产业开发区的发展:[硕士论文].西安建筑科技大学,2004
[172]左大培,杨春学.经济增长理论模型的内生化历程.北京:中国经济出版社,2007
[173] Ahuja G, Katila R. Technological Acquisition and the Innovation Performance ofAcquiring Firms:A Longitudinal Study. Strategic Management Journal, 2001(22):197-220
[174] Andersson,M.,C.Karlasson. Regional Innovation Systems in Small & Medium-sized Regions: a Critical Review & Assessment. JIBS Working Paper Series, 2002(2): 67-72
[175] Asheim,B.,P.Cooke. Local Learning and Interactive Innovation Networks in a Global Economy. in Edward J.et al(eds). Making Connections:Technological Learning and Regional Economic Change. Ashgate, 1998
[176] Barro,R.J. Democracy and Growth.Journal of Economic Growth. 1996 (3):1-27
[177] Casper,S.. High Technology Governance and Institutional Adaptiveness. Discussion Paper. Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies, 1999
[178] Cooke,P.. From Technopoles to Regional Innovation Systems: the Evolution of Localized Technology Development Policy. University of Wales ,UK., 2001
[179] Ebner ,A.r. Innovation Policies and Locational Competitiveness:Lessons from Singapore. 1st ASIALICS International Conference on“Innovation Systems and Clusters in Asia:Challenges and Regional Integration”,Bangkok,Thailand, 2004
[180] Fischer,M.. the Innovation Process and Network Activities of Manufacturing Firms. In Fischer,M., Suarez-Villa,L.&Steiner, M(eds)Innovation, Networks and Localities, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999
[181] Fischer,M... Innovation,Knowledge Creation and System of Innovation. Analysis of Regional Science, 2001, 35: 199-216
[182] Freeman C, Soete L. The Economics of Industrial Innovation .MIT, 1998
[183] Griliches Z. Patents as Economic Indicators:A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 2000, 28(4):1661-1707
[184] Guangzhou HU,Albert. Technology Parks and Regional Economic Growth in China. National University of Singapore, 2005
[185] Henrekson, M., & Rosenberg, N. Designing Efficient Institutions for Science-basedEntrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden. Journal of Technology Transfer, Technology Transfer, 2001(26):207-231
[186] Keefer,Philip and Stephen Knack. Institutions and Economic Performance: Cross-country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Measures. Economics and Politics, 1995(7): 207-227
[187] Kinlgren, A.. the Development of Science Parks in St.Petersburg(Russia). University of Glasgow, 2004
[188] Kitagawa ,F.. Innovation Systems, University-Business Networks and Regionali- zation of the Knowledge Economy in Japan. Regionalization of Innovation Policy—Option and Experience, Berlin, 2004
[189] Kon ,F. C.,Winston T.H.Kon,Feichin Ted Tschang. An Analytical Framework for Science Parks and Technology Districts with an Application to Singapore, SMU Economics & Statistics Working Paper Series. Singapore Management University, 2003
[190] Kormendi,R..and Philip G. Meguire. Macroeconomic Determinants of Growth: Cross-Country Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1985(9): 141-163
[191] Kumar, S.. Innovative Capability and Performanceof Chnese Firms. Journal of Development Studies, 2002, (2): 59-67
[192] Lucas,R..On The Mechanic of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988(22): 4-42
[193] Porter,M.E.The Comparative Advantage of Nations. New York: Macmilan, 1990
[194] Poti B, Basile R. Differences in Innovation Performance Between Advanced and Backward Regions in Italy[R]. CNR- ISRDS, 2000
[195] Ressico ,A.. Innovative Enterprises in Science Park: Difficulty and Route of Growth. 13th Nordic Conference on Small Business Research, 2004
[196] Rubini ,D.. A Critical Analysis of Science and Technology Parks:Learning from the Italian Experience. University of Lisboa, 2002
[197] Sanz,L..the Role of Science & Technology Park in Economic Development. International Association of Science Parks (IASP), 2001
[198] Thomas,J.. Institutional Innovation and the Prospects for Transference: Transferring Singaporean Institutions to Suzhou China. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2001
[199] Wallsten,S.. the Role of Government in Regional High-Tech Development: the Effects of Public Venture Capital and Science Parks. Stanford University, 2001
[200] Wallsten,S..Do Science Parks Generate Regional Economic Growth? An Empirical Analysis of their Effects on Job Growth and Venture Capital. Working Paper, American Enterprise Institute, 2004
[201] Xie linliu, Steven White. Innovation and Firm Performance. Econometric Explorations of Survey Data Palgrave . London,2001
[202] Uzawa H. Optimal Technical Change in an Aggregate Aggregative Model of Economic Growth. International Economic Review, 1965(6): 8-31